Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Delay and laches can defeat a request for interim protection against recovery proceedings where the party waits to approach the Court after receiving an initial notice threatening coercive action. The Court noted that the petitioner had already replied with objections to the notice, so any challenge to the proposed recovery and alleged non-consideration of the representation should have been made promptly at that stage. Because the petition was filed only after later recovery notices were issued, the delay was treated as unjustified for interim relief. Interim protection was refused, while the petition remained pending and the respondents were asked to explain the non-consideration of the representation and the timing of the recovery action.
Delay and laches can defeat a request for interim protection against recovery proceedings where the party waits to approach the Court after receiving an initial notice threatening coercive action. The Court noted that the petitioner had already replied with objections to the notice, so any challenge to the proposed recovery and alleged non-consideration of the representation should have been made promptly at that stage. Because the petition was filed only after later recovery notices were issued, the delay was treated as unjustified for interim relief. Interim protection was refused, while the petition remained pending and the respondents were asked to explain the non-consideration of the representation and the timing of the recovery action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
