Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules raised whether proceedings pending under the deleted provision could continue. The court applied the saving clause doctrine, reasoning that continuance of proceedings after omission is permissible only if a saving clause exists; in the absence of any saving clause the pending proceedings lapse. This conclusion is stated subject to the General Clauses Act and specifically Section 6 of that Act. Writ petitions were allowed, resulting in setting aside of the impugned assessment orders.
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules raised whether proceedings pending under the deleted provision could continue. The court applied the saving clause doctrine, reasoning that continuance of proceedings after omission is permissible only if a saving clause exists; in the absence of any saving clause the pending proceedings lapse. This conclusion is stated subject to the General Clauses Act and specifically Section 6 of that Act. Writ petitions were allowed, resulting in setting aside of the impugned assessment orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.