<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Delegated Additional Commissioner&#039;s suo motu revision under s.23(4)(a) upheld; remedy limited to appeal under s.23(4)(c)(ii)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92391</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the writ challenging a suo motu revision order by an Additional Commissioner under s.23(4)(a) of the OST Act, holding the Additional Commissioner validly exercised delegated revisionary power and that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to re-initiate revision once such delegated power was exercised. By virtue of the non-obstante clause in s.23(4)(d) and the delegation scheme under s.3/Rule 3, any remedy lies by way of appeal to the Commissioner under s.23(4)(c)(ii). The petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy against the order dated 31 May 2025 before the Commissioner and may raise all available grounds; the writ petition was disposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:55 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=849387" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Delegated Additional Commissioner&#039;s suo motu revision under s.23(4)(a) upheld; remedy limited to appeal under s.23(4)(c)(ii)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92391</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the writ challenging a suo motu revision order by an Additional Commissioner under s.23(4)(a) of the OST Act, holding the Additional Commissioner validly exercised delegated revisionary power and that the Commissioner lacked jurisdiction to re-initiate revision once such delegated power was exercised. By virtue of the non-obstante clause in s.23(4)(d) and the delegation scheme under s.3/Rule 3, any remedy lies by way of appeal to the Commissioner under s.23(4)(c)(ii). The petitioner was directed to pursue the statutory appellate remedy against the order dated 31 May 2025 before the Commissioner and may raise all available grounds; the writ petition was disposed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 08:39:55 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=92391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>