Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
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...
Allegations of bogus or paper transactions in the supply chain can support cancellation of GST registration even while return scrutiny is pending, because the two proceedings may run separately and the pendency of scrutiny creates no legal bar. Where the cancellation notice turns on disputed facts, writ jurisdiction is not the proper forum for fact-finding, and the controversy must be tested on evidence before the statutory authority. The High Court therefore declined interference under Article 226, found no adverse meaning could be attached merely to the reference to pending scrutiny, and left the assessee to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Allegations of bogus or paper transactions in the supply chain can support cancellation of GST registration even while return scrutiny is pending, because the two proceedings may run separately and the pendency of scrutiny creates no legal bar. Where the cancellation notice turns on disputed facts, writ jurisdiction is not the proper forum for fact-finding, and the controversy must be tested on evidence before the statutory authority. The High Court therefore declined interference under Article 226, found no adverse meaning could be attached merely to the reference to pending scrutiny, and left the assessee to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
