Co-operative society's mandatory reserve and share capital fixed deposits with banks-interest treated as business income under 80P(2)(a)(iii) deductio...
Income tax reassessment reopening after four years on investigation tip, without s.147 proviso disclosure failure, struck down as borrowed satisfactio...
Article 226 writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily supplant an efficacious statutory appeal where the petitioner, by fault, disabled itself from filing the statutory remedy; failure to show sufficient cause for delay in instituting the appeal justified refusal to exercise discretionary writ relief. The adjudication cancelling GST registration was not set aside for breach of natural justice because show cause notices and opportunities to be heard were issued and the petitioner neither responded nor demonstrated non service; a bare allegation of ex parte decision contradicted the record. Petition dismissed for failure to bypass the alternate statutory remedy and to establish procedural unfairness.
Article 226 writ jurisdiction should not ordinarily supplant an efficacious statutory appeal where the petitioner, by fault, disabled itself from filing the statutory remedy; failure to show sufficient cause for delay in instituting the appeal justified refusal to exercise discretionary writ relief. The adjudication cancelling GST registration was not set aside for breach of natural justice because show cause notices and opportunities to be heard were issued and the petitioner neither responded nor demonstrated non service; a bare allegation of ex parte decision contradicted the record. Petition dismissed for failure to bypass the alternate statutory remedy and to establish procedural unfairness.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
