Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Solar inverters supplied for use in solar power generating systems were treated as integral parts of that system and, on the material produced, fell within Sl. No. 234 of Notification No. 1/2017-CT(R), attracting GST at 5%. The Court held that the concession extends to parts used for manufacture of solar power generating systems, and that assembling such parts into a new product with a distinct name, character and use satisfies the definition of manufacture. It also held that expressions such as "required to manufacture" and "for use" refer to intended use, so proof of actual end-use was not necessary. The contrary orders were quashed to that extent.
Solar inverters supplied for use in solar power generating systems were treated as integral parts of that system and, on the material produced, fell within Sl. No. 234 of Notification No. 1/2017-CT(R), attracting GST at 5%. The Court held that the concession extends to parts used for manufacture of solar power generating systems, and that assembling such parts into a new product with a distinct name, character and use satisfies the definition of manufacture. It also held that expressions such as "required to manufacture" and "for use" refer to intended use, so proof of actual end-use was not necessary. The contrary orders were quashed to that extent.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.