Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Section 6(2)(b) bars parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter, but summons and other investigative steps do not by themselves amount to initiation of such proceedings. Applying the Supreme Court's ruling in Armour Security, the HC noted possible overlap between Central and State GST action, but declined to decide the merits of that overlap on the material before it. It directed the assessee to comply with the summons and raise the objection before the concerned authority, while requiring the State and Central authorities to communicate and coordinate so that the assessee is not subjected to multiple adjudicatory processes on the same subject matter. The merits and validity of the summons and notice were left open.
Section 6(2)(b) bars parallel adjudicatory proceedings on the same subject matter, but summons and other investigative steps do not by themselves amount to initiation of such proceedings. Applying the Supreme Court's ruling in Armour Security, the HC noted possible overlap between Central and State GST action, but declined to decide the merits of that overlap on the material before it. It directed the assessee to comply with the summons and raise the objection before the concerned authority, while requiring the State and Central authorities to communicate and coordinate so that the assessee is not subjected to multiple adjudicatory processes on the same subject matter. The merits and validity of the summons and notice were left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
