Impleading of the Jurisdictional Commissioner as another ...

Tribunal Clarifies Respondent Inclusion: Specific Commissionerate Required, Multiple Respondents Allowed in Appeals.

March 11, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

Impleading of the Jurisdictional Commissioner as another respondent alongwith Commissioner (Adjudication) - The Tribunal examined Rule 12 of the CESTAT Procedure Rules, 1982, which states who may be joined as respondents. It was clarified that the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner concerned should be impleaded as the respondent. The Tribunal interpreted the term "concerned" to mean the Commissionerate issuing the show cause notice, making the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of that Commissionerate the relevant party to the case. - The Tribunal found that there was no restriction on impleading more than one respondent in appeals filed, especially in cases involving multiple jurisdictions.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Impleading of the Jurisdictional Commissioner as another ...

Tribunal Clarifies Respondent Inclusion: Specific Commissionerate Required, Multiple Respondents Allowed in Appeals.

March 11, 2024

Case Laws Customs AT

You may also like:

Multiple assessments in the same Bills of Entry - Finalization of provisional assessment - The Tribunal clarified that the Customs Act allows for reassessment before...

Penalty u/s 271 (1) (c) - adoption of multiple year data OR single year data for determining ALP - the fact remains that the legislature thought it necessary to clarify...

The Appellate Tribunal examined the validity of penalty proceedings u/s 270A due to the failure to specify relevant clauses. It was held that the penalty proceedings...

The ITAT dismissed Revenue's appeal, holding that penalty under s.271G for failure to furnish transfer pricing documentation cannot be levied against the German resident...

The Appellate Tribunal considered whether the assessee, a trust registered u/s 12AA, qualified for exemption u/s 11 as a charitable entity. The AO argued the trust's...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the conversion of free Shipping Bills into drawback Shipping Bills u/s 149 of Customs Act. It clarified that goods funded by KOICA for...

The Appellate Tribunal considered the validity of a re-assessment notice issued by the jurisdictional AO instead of the designated Faceless Assessing Officer (FAO) as...

The Delhi High Court addressed the consolidation of multiple offences in a complaint u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It interpreted Section 219 of the...

LTCG - deduction u/s 54F - as pursuant to the JDA, assessee had received multiple residential units and not a single residential unit - The Tribunal observed that prior...

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal considered whether an assessee can claim deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the first time in the return...

Search and seizure - jurisdiction of CGST Delhi North Commissionerate - reasons to believe - Admittedly, in the instant case, no investigations were carried out against...

Inclusion of gender specific infrastructure facilities - The Trade Notice issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai IV, outlines significant enhancements in...

The ITAT rejected the Revenue's appeal concerning disallowance of exemption under s.10(23C)(vi). The Tribunal accepted the assessee's contention that the AO failed to...

The case involved denial of exemption u/s 11 due to late filing of return. The department argued return must be filed u/s 139(1) to claim exemption u/s 11. An amendment...

ITAT ruled that denial of deduction under section 80JJAA through rectification proceedings under s.154 was invalid. The tribunal emphasized that s.154's scope is...

Quick Updates: