Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Where an efficacious statutory appeal exists under the GST framework, recourse to the appeal remedy must ordinarily precede invocation of Article 226. Applying the rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies as one of policy, convenience and discretion, the High Court found no special circumstance to depart from that principle and declined to examine the GST demand on merits. As the petitioner was still within the appeal period under Section 107, liberty was granted to file the appeal within seven days, and it was directed to be treated as within limitation subject to compliance with statutory requirements.
Where an efficacious statutory appeal exists under the GST framework, recourse to the appeal remedy must ordinarily precede invocation of Article 226. Applying the rule of exhaustion of statutory remedies as one of policy, convenience and discretion, the High Court found no special circumstance to depart from that principle and declined to examine the GST demand on merits. As the petitioner was still within the appeal period under Section 107, liberty was granted to file the appeal within seven days, and it was directed to be treated as within limitation subject to compliance with statutory requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
