Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Availability of an efficacious statutory appeal barred writ interference against an order under the CGST Act where the challenge depended on reassessment of the show-cause notice, record and findings on wrongful ITC availment, fraud, wilful misstatement and suppression. The Court held that such factual and merits-based objections did not show that the proceedings were wholly without jurisdiction, and any alleged error in the officer's conclusions had to be tested in appeal. It also found no patent breach of natural justice, since notice and opportunity to respond were afforded and the order dealt with the objections raised. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to file a statutory appeal within four weeks.
Availability of an efficacious statutory appeal barred writ interference against an order under the CGST Act where the challenge depended on reassessment of the show-cause notice, record and findings on wrongful ITC availment, fraud, wilful misstatement and suppression. The Court held that such factual and merits-based objections did not show that the proceedings were wholly without jurisdiction, and any alleged error in the officer's conclusions had to be tested in appeal. It also found no patent breach of natural justice, since notice and opportunity to respond were afforded and the order dealt with the objections raised. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to file a statutory appeal within four weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.