Donor-directed corpus contributions retain capital character despite exemption claims under section 10(23C)(vi), preventing their treatment as taxable...
Enhanced tax-audit threshold applies where banking records establish compliant non-cash receipts and payments, eliminating penalty exposure for audit ...
Transfer pricing consistency protects identical non-interest-bearing debenture terms from a later notional-interest adjustment without valid statutory...
Rectification of debatable deduction claims cannot reverse scrutiny-approved co-operative society interest income deductions as apparent record errors...
Cash-method accounting bars presumptive interest taxation, while unsupported securities and share-trading additions require reliable material and veri...
Section 7 admission requires established financial debt and default, not precise interest quantification, while post-suspension defaults remain action...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
141 to 160 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
