Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1101 to 1120 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 128 of the Customs Act permits an appeal within 60 days of communication of the order, with only a further 30 days available for condonation by the appellate authority; beyond that outer limit, the authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The High Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal in refusing to admit appeals filed after the statutory period. It further held that this limitation does not create an absolute bar to constitutional relief under Article 226. As the delay showed no deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides and the merits had never been examined, the Court condoned the delay subject to costs, set aside the appellate orders, and directed restoration of the appeal for fresh decision on merits.
Section 128 of the Customs Act permits an appeal within 60 days of communication of the order, with only a further 30 days available for condonation by the appellate authority; beyond that outer limit, the authority lacks jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The High Court upheld the Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal in refusing to admit appeals filed after the statutory period. It further held that this limitation does not create an absolute bar to constitutional relief under Article 226. As the delay showed no deliberate inaction or lack of bona fides and the merits had never been examined, the Court condoned the delay subject to costs, set aside the appellate orders, and directed restoration of the appeal for fresh decision on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
