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...
State GST authorities may initiate intelligence-based enforcement action under the GST regime even where the taxpayer is administratively assigned to the Central administration, so the challenge to jurisdiction failed. Disputes over classification and the assessing authority's finding of suppression for invoking Section 74 involved disputed facts and could not be examined in writ jurisdiction, so those objections had to be pursued before the statutory appellate authority under Section 107. The writ court was therefore correct in directing the taxpayer to avail the appeal remedy while leaving all grounds, including jurisdiction, open before the appellate forum.
State GST authorities may initiate intelligence-based enforcement action under the GST regime even where the taxpayer is administratively assigned to the Central administration, so the challenge to jurisdiction failed. Disputes over classification and the assessing authority's finding of suppression for invoking Section 74 involved disputed facts and could not be examined in writ jurisdiction, so those objections had to be pursued before the statutory appellate authority under Section 107. The writ court was therefore correct in directing the taxpayer to avail the appeal remedy while leaving all grounds, including jurisdiction, open before the appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
