The petitioner is aggrieved with the cancellation of registration by Annexure P-2 order passed on 09.02.2023. against which ...

However, the NCLAT ruled that the limitation period should be calculated from the date the order was pronounced in court, as ...

The CESTAT Chennai examined the case and ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that reliance on NIDB data alone is ...

The Bombay High Court emphasized that statutory provisions should override administrative rules when conflicts arise. Citing ...

In the case of Satyananda Kabi Vs Additional Commissioner of GST (Appeals), the Orissa High Court addressed a petition ...

Heading 2106 (Others), which attracts 18% GST. The Gujarat Authority for Advance Ruling (GAAR) had previously ruled that the ...

Affidavit of service filed today in Court is kept with the record.

In the case of Subramaniam Senthil Kumar Vs Superintendent of GST and Central Excise before the Madras High Court, the ...

In the case of Anup Kumar Agarwal Vs. Union of India & Ors., the petitioner challenged a notice issued under Section 148 of ...

3. Being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the learned CIT (A) who vide impugned order dismissed the appeal in limine invoking the provisions of section 249 (4) of the I.T. Act, 1961.

Principal Commissioner of Central Tax GST, the Karnataka High Court set aside a service tax demand order issued to the petitioner, an individual advocate. The advocate challenged the order, asserting ...

Summary: The Supreme Court’s judgment in Coal India Ltd vs Competition Commission of India (2023) focuses on whether Coal ...