Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1441 to 1460 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Writ jurisdiction against a show cause notice is not barred in all cases and may be invoked where there is patent lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, non-application of mind or breach of natural justice; the High Court's refusal to entertain the challenge on maintainability alone was therefore unjustified. Under Section 37A FEMA, seizure depends on a substantive "reason to believe" that the foreign asset is held in contravention of Section 4, and refusal by the Competent Authority to confirm seizure is a considered finding that the threshold was not met. The High Court and the final adjudication order were set aside because they proceeded as if seizure had been confirmed and impaired the pending departmental appeal; the matter was restored to the show cause stage, with the appeal to be decided first.
Writ jurisdiction against a show cause notice is not barred in all cases and may be invoked where there is patent lack of jurisdiction, abuse of process, non-application of mind or breach of natural justice; the High Court's refusal to entertain the challenge on maintainability alone was therefore unjustified. Under Section 37A FEMA, seizure depends on a substantive "reason to believe" that the foreign asset is held in contravention of Section 4, and refusal by the Competent Authority to confirm seizure is a considered finding that the threshold was not met. The High Court and the final adjudication order were set aside because they proceeded as if seizure had been confirmed and impaired the pending departmental appeal; the matter was restored to the show cause stage, with the appeal to be decided first.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
