Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
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...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
641 to 660 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Tribunal treated the Rule 128 timeline for Standing Committee reference as directory, so procedural delay did not defeat anti-profiteering proceedings. It held that the respondent failed to pass on additional input tax credit to homebuyers, and that the profiteered amount had to include the GST component because buyers paid the higher price inclusive of tax. Interest was upheld as payable under the Rules from the dates of collection until refund. Penalty was attracted prospectively only for the period from 1 January 2020 onward, subject to the statutory relief if the amount is deposited within thirty days.
The Tribunal treated the Rule 128 timeline for Standing Committee reference as directory, so procedural delay did not defeat anti-profiteering proceedings. It held that the respondent failed to pass on additional input tax credit to homebuyers, and that the profiteered amount had to include the GST component because buyers paid the higher price inclusive of tax. Interest was upheld as payable under the Rules from the dates of collection until refund. Penalty was attracted prospectively only for the period from 1 January 2020 onward, subject to the statutory relief if the amount is deposited within thirty days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.