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...
Challenge to an order-in-original raising demand exceeding the show-cause notice was not entertained in writ because an efficacious statutory appeal remedy was available; the petitioner was relegated to file an appeal before the appellate authority. On the pre-deposit dispute, the court recorded a prima facie view that, under s.75 CGST Act, the adjudication demand cannot exceed the SCN demand, rendering any excess demand unsustainable, and directed the appellate authority to decide whether the mandatory 10% deposit is to be computed on the SCN demand or the total demand in the order-in-original; physical filing with a 10% deposit application was permitted if the appeal is filed with the order. - HC
Challenge to an order-in-original raising demand exceeding the show-cause notice was not entertained in writ because an efficacious statutory appeal remedy was available; the petitioner was relegated to file an appeal before the appellate authority. On the pre-deposit dispute, the court recorded a prima facie view that, under s.75 CGST Act, the adjudication demand cannot exceed the SCN demand, rendering any excess demand unsustainable, and directed the appellate authority to decide whether the mandatory 10% deposit is to be computed on the SCN demand or the total demand in the order-in-original; physical filing with a 10% deposit application was permitted if the appeal is filed with the order. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
