Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC dismissed the writ petition filed by A against the adjudication order passed under S.73 of the GST Act on the ground of non-maintainability. It held that a statutory appellate remedy under S.107 was available and the appellate authority's power to condone delay is strictly confined to an additional thirty days beyond the initial three-month limitation, with no jurisdiction to extend it further. The impugned order dated 22.10.2024 was challenged only on 23.10.2025, with no sufficient cause pleaded for not availing the appellate remedy or for the belated approach to the HC. The HC found that A sought to circumvent the statutory scheme and therefore refused to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Arts.226/227.
The HC dismissed the writ petition filed by A against the adjudication order passed under S.73 of the GST Act on the ground of non-maintainability. It held that a statutory appellate remedy under S.107 was available and the appellate authority's power to condone delay is strictly confined to an additional thirty days beyond the initial three-month limitation, with no jurisdiction to extend it further. The impugned order dated 22.10.2024 was challenged only on 23.10.2025, with no sufficient cause pleaded for not availing the appellate remedy or for the belated approach to the HC. The HC found that A sought to circumvent the statutory scheme and therefore refused to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Arts.226/227.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.