Educational approval requires mandatory State registration, but incidental surplus and trustee-owned land do not prove private benefit or profit motiv...
Judicial review of settlement orders cannot reopen settled customs notices, while statutory interest remains subject to verification and quantificatio...
Customs Broker licence lending for consideration justified revocation where exporter authorisation and client verification obligations were also breac...
Fraudulent import documents suspend limitation protection, while redemption of confiscated goods requires duty and interest despite bona fide purchase...
ODR arbitration participation remains mandatory after failed conciliation, while jurisdictional and maintainability objections stay available before t...
Transparency in technical bid evaluation requires disclosed standards and recorded reasons; opaque scoring invalidated tender awards and required fres...
Automated export obligation extensions remove separate regional applications after committee approval for Advance Authorisation and EPCG authorisation...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly cover more than one tax period once the due date for filing the annual return has been reached. Applying an earlier Division Bench view, the HC held that the impugned assessment, framed by one order for multiple financial years, was unsustainable and set it aside. The matter was remitted with liberty to commence fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year, and the intervening period was excluded for limitation purposes. All other grounds raised by the petitioner were left open.
A single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly cover more than one tax period once the due date for filing the annual return has been reached. Applying an earlier Division Bench view, the HC held that the impugned assessment, framed by one order for multiple financial years, was unsustainable and set it aside. The matter was remitted with liberty to commence fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year, and the intervening period was excluded for limitation purposes. All other grounds raised by the petitioner were left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.