Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 96177 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.