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 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
GST registration cancellation could not stand where the original order was non-speaking and did not disclose the date, mode or manner of service of the show cause notice, despite service being disputed. Proceeding ex parte on an assumed service basis without recording those particulars rendered the cancellation order unsustainable, and it was set aside with remand for fresh decision after reply and hearing. The appellate order was also vitiated because the authority failed to consider the specific grounds for condonation of delay raised in the appeal memorandum and instead relied on assumptions not reflected in the appeal itself. That order too was set aside.
GST registration cancellation could not stand where the original order was non-speaking and did not disclose the date, mode or manner of service of the show cause notice, despite service being disputed. Proceeding ex parte on an assumed service basis without recording those particulars rendered the cancellation order unsustainable, and it was set aside with remand for fresh decision after reply and hearing. The appellate order was also vitiated because the authority failed to consider the specific grounds for condonation of delay raised in the appeal memorandum and instead relied on assumptions not reflected in the appeal itself. That order too was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.