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...
Under the GST regime, intelligence-based enforcement may be initiated by either Central or State tax authorities even where the taxpayer is registered with the other administration, so the State authority's jurisdiction to begin proceedings and issue orders was upheld. Classification disputes and objections to invocation of Section 74 involved disputed factual questions and were not entertained in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Those grounds, including the plea that the reply was not properly considered, were held to be matters for statutory appeal, and the writ petitions were dismissed with liberty to appeal.
Under the GST regime, intelligence-based enforcement may be initiated by either Central or State tax authorities even where the taxpayer is registered with the other administration, so the State authority's jurisdiction to begin proceedings and issue orders was upheld. Classification disputes and objections to invocation of Section 74 involved disputed factual questions and were not entertained in writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Those grounds, including the plea that the reply was not properly considered, were held to be matters for statutory appeal, and the writ petitions were dismissed with liberty to appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.