Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
Insurer's investment gains and investment write-downs face Section 263 revision; enquiry upheld, Rule 5(b)(ii) lapse sustained, late corrigendum quash...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7241 to 7260 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Detention and penalty proceedings under s.129 of the CGST/GGST Act were challenged on the ground that the adjudication order under s.129(3) was issued beyond the statutory seven-day limit from service of notice. Since the notice in Form GST MOV-07 was served on 10.11.2025 and the order in Form GST MOV-09 was passed on 19.11.2025, the authority acted in breach of s.129(3), rendering the order without legal validity; consequently, the detention order in Form GST MOV-06, the notice in Form GST MOV-07, and the order in Form GST MOV-09 were quashed, and the petition was allowed. - HC
Detention and penalty proceedings under s.129 of the CGST/GGST Act were challenged on the ground that the adjudication order under s.129(3) was issued beyond the statutory seven-day limit from service of notice. Since the notice in Form GST MOV-07 was served on 10.11.2025 and the order in Form GST MOV-09 was passed on 19.11.2025, the authority acted in breach of s.129(3), rendering the order without legal validity; consequently, the detention order in Form GST MOV-06, the notice in Form GST MOV-07, and the order in Form GST MOV-09 were quashed, and the petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
