Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
