Revisability of return invalidation communications under tax procedure affirmed, impugned non revisional finding quashed and matter remitted for fresh...
Transferable duty credit scrips validity and bona fide transferee entitlement to exemption upheld where scrips were subsisting at import, appeals allo...
Classification of knocked down motor vehicle component imports: Notification benefit denied because items are standalone non kit parts requiring subst...
Reassessment against a deceased assessee: procedural defect mandates fresh reassessment; nonresponsive petitioner may be treated as legal representati...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6461 to 6480 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
After insertion of Article 226(2), territorial jurisdiction extends to a High Court where part of the cause of action arises. Because the amalgamated petitioner was at Pune, the recovery notice was received there, the consequences of the impugned demands operated there, and the case had been transferred under Section 127 to the Pune officer, the writ petition was maintainable in Bombay; the Delhi officer was functus officio and effective relief could be granted only in Pune. On merits, the Revenue failed to produce any assessment, rectification, intimation, or service record supporting the demands, so an adverse inference arose and recovery of the non-existent demands was impermissible. The demands, recovery notice, and computation sheets were quashed.
After insertion of Article 226(2), territorial jurisdiction extends to a High Court where part of the cause of action arises. Because the amalgamated petitioner was at Pune, the recovery notice was received there, the consequences of the impugned demands operated there, and the case had been transferred under Section 127 to the Pune officer, the writ petition was maintainable in Bombay; the Delhi officer was functus officio and effective relief could be granted only in Pune. On merits, the Revenue failed to produce any assessment, rectification, intimation, or service record supporting the demands, so an adverse inference arose and recovery of the non-existent demands was impermissible. The demands, recovery notice, and computation sheets were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.