Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules by Notification No.20/2024, made without a saving clause, operates prospectively and applies to pending non final proceedings, causing proceedings founded on the omitted rule (including undisposed show cause notices and non final orders) to lapse. Consequentially, impugned non final orders are quashed and petitioners are entitled to have their IGST refund claims for export of goods processed or restored for processing. Where no alternate appellate forum exists or tribunal is unconstituted, orders not finally adjudicated cannot be treated as final, reinforcing entitlement to refund processing within prescribed timeframes.
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the CGST Rules by Notification No.20/2024, made without a saving clause, operates prospectively and applies to pending non final proceedings, causing proceedings founded on the omitted rule (including undisposed show cause notices and non final orders) to lapse. Consequentially, impugned non final orders are quashed and petitioners are entitled to have their IGST refund claims for export of goods processed or restored for processing. Where no alternate appellate forum exists or tribunal is unconstituted, orders not finally adjudicated cannot be treated as final, reinforcing entitlement to refund processing within prescribed timeframes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
