Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
The Appellate Authority cannot entertain a GST appeal filed beyond four months from communication of the adjudicating order, and Article 226 interference to bypass that statutory bar is confined to exceptional and extraordinary cases. Here, the order was served through the GST Portal and was within the taxpayer's knowledge, while the medical evidence did not show any disabling circumstance sufficient to explain the delay. The Court therefore found no exceptional ground to condone the delay or invoke writ jurisdiction, and the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was sustained.
The Appellate Authority cannot entertain a GST appeal filed beyond four months from communication of the adjudicating order, and Article 226 interference to bypass that statutory bar is confined to exceptional and extraordinary cases. Here, the order was served through the GST Portal and was within the taxpayer's knowledge, while the medical evidence did not show any disabling circumstance sufficient to explain the delay. The Court therefore found no exceptional ground to condone the delay or invoke writ jurisdiction, and the rejection of the appeal as time-barred was sustained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.