RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY, DEEPAK ROSHAN
Kamaladitya Construction (P) Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax, Ranchi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK ROSHAN, J.
1. The instant application has been preferred for the following reliefs:
(ii) For issuance of writs, orders and/or directions, for quashing and setting aside the impugned Notice dated 06.06.2022 bearing No. C. No. V (65) 03/Adjn./KCPL/Bok (RanII)/2014/3167 (Annexure-2) issued by the Superintendent (Adjudication) O/o Principal Commissioner of Central Goods and Services Tax and Central Excise, Central Revenue Building, 5-A, Mahatma Gandhi Road (Main Road), Ranchi-834001, the Respondent No. 3.
(iii) Pending final hearing of this Petition, the Respondents, their servants, agents and subordinates be restrained from giving any effect and/or further effects to and/or acting on the basis of Petitioner in the present writ Petition under Article 226/Article 227 of the Constitution of India is challenging the legality and validity of impugned Show Cause Notice date
Abdul Rehman Antulay vs. R.S. Nayak
Aswini Kumar Ghose vs. Arabinda Bose
CCE vs. Krishna Wax Pvt. Ltd. (2020) 12 SCC 572 (SC)
CCE, New Delhi vs. M/s Bhagsons Paint Industry (India)
Government of India vs. Citedal Fine Pharmaceuticals
GPI Textiles Ltd. vs. Union of India
J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. vs. State of U.P. AIR 1961 SC 1170
Kirkness vs. John Hudson and Co. Ltd. (1955) 2 All ER 345 : 1955 AC 696 : (1955) 2 WLR 1135
K.B. Nagur, M.D. (Ayurvedic) vs. Union of India
Quebec Railway, Light Heat and Power Co. Ltd. vs. Vandry
Raj Leathers vs. Secretary, Home Ministry
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.