https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254523 A demand and recovery action issued by a non-jurisdictional authority for transactions already assessed by the competent authority was treated as without inherent jurisdiction and a nullity. The parallel order in original, recovery proceedings, and consequential steps were therefore unsustainable. The rejection of the recall application and the delayed appeal did not cure the defect, because an order passed without jurisdiction cannot be validated by limitation or by failure to challenge it earlier. The writ petition was allowed and the impugned orders were set aside. en-us Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jul 2015 16:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254523 A demand and recovery action issued by a non-jurisdictional authority for transactions already assessed by the competent authority was treated as without inherent jurisdiction and a nullity. The parallel order in original, recovery proceedings, and consequential steps were therefore unsustainable. The rejection of the recall application and the delayed appeal did not cure the defect, because an order passed without jurisdiction cannot be validated by limitation or by failure to challenge it earlier. The writ petition was allowed and the impugned orders were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 23 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254523