Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Employee travel, hospitality, conveyance, tickets, goods, and hotel boarding expenses were held to fall within the statutory heads of fringe benefits under section 115WB(1)(b) read with section 115WB(2), so the Tribunal upheld the quantum assessment on those items. The Commissioner (Appeals) was also found to have issued only a limited consequential direction to verify tax already paid and finalise computation, not an impermissible fresh remand on merits. On penalty, the Tribunal sustained cancellation under section 271(1)(d), holding that rejection of the assessee's exclusion claim in quantum proceedings did not by itself establish inaccurate particulars, following Reliance Petroproducts.
Employee travel, hospitality, conveyance, tickets, goods, and hotel boarding expenses were held to fall within the statutory heads of fringe benefits under section 115WB(1)(b) read with section 115WB(2), so the Tribunal upheld the quantum assessment on those items. The Commissioner (Appeals) was also found to have issued only a limited consequential direction to verify tax already paid and finalise computation, not an impermissible fresh remand on merits. On penalty, the Tribunal sustained cancellation under section 271(1)(d), holding that rejection of the assessee's exclusion claim in quantum proceedings did not by itself establish inaccurate particulars, following Reliance Petroproducts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.