Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Penalty under Section 125 of the GST Act could not be imposed separately under CGST and SGST beyond the statutory maximum for the same contravention. The High Court held that a penalty of Rs. 25,000 under CGST plus a further Rs. 25,000 under SGST was not justified where the provision prescribed a maximum penalty of Rs. 25,000. The original penalty order was therefore unsustainable, and the consequential appellate order also could not stand. Both orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the competent authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Penalty under Section 125 of the GST Act could not be imposed separately under CGST and SGST beyond the statutory maximum for the same contravention. The High Court held that a penalty of Rs. 25,000 under CGST plus a further Rs. 25,000 under SGST was not justified where the provision prescribed a maximum penalty of Rs. 25,000. The original penalty order was therefore unsustainable, and the consequential appellate order also could not stand. Both orders were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the competent authority for fresh consideration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.