Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Advance ruling was barred where the same input tax credit question was already pending in enforcement proceedings against the applicant. The Authority held that, under the proviso to section 98(2), an advance ruling cannot be admitted on a question already pending in proceedings under the Act in the applicant's case. Because the jurisdictional authority had already initiated action on admissibility of input tax credit for construction of the hotel building, and the applicant did not dispute that fact, the application was rejected without any ruling on the merits.
Advance ruling was barred where the same input tax credit question was already pending in enforcement proceedings against the applicant. The Authority held that, under the proviso to section 98(2), an advance ruling cannot be admitted on a question already pending in proceedings under the Act in the applicant's case. Because the jurisdictional authority had already initiated action on admissibility of input tax credit for construction of the hotel building, and the applicant did not dispute that fact, the application was rejected without any ruling on the merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.