Country of Origin Certificates and declared transaction value supported preferential customs exemption where authenticity and invoice prices remained ...
Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Page of 4814
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96262 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
An assessment order under the GST regime was held vitiated because it did not bear a Document Identification Number, following the Court's earlier view that absence of a DIN invalidates the order. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment after hearing the taxpayer. On the delayed writ challenge and disputed portal service, the Court did not finally resolve the service controversy but held that petitions attacking assessment orders with patent irregularities could be entertained on terms. Relief was made conditional on deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with the period of writ pendency excluded for limitation and liberty preserved to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.
An assessment order under the GST regime was held vitiated because it did not bear a Document Identification Number, following the Court's earlier view that absence of a DIN invalidates the order. The order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh assessment after hearing the taxpayer. On the delayed writ challenge and disputed portal service, the Court did not finally resolve the service controversy but held that petitions attacking assessment orders with patent irregularities could be entertained on terms. Relief was made conditional on deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with the period of writ pendency excluded for limitation and liberty preserved to raise all contentions before the Assessing Officer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.