Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Co-operative deduction eligibility excludes refund and commercial-bank interest, while qualifying co-operative investments require entity-wise verific...
Enhanced tax rate on surrendered unexplained income applies prospectively, while cash-deposit telescoping requires verification of available surrender...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
GST assessment orders concerning short payment of tax and alleged non-payment on seigniorage fees under reverse charge mechanism were remitted for fresh adjudication. On the short-reported turnover issue, the impugned orders were treated as an addendum to the show cause notices, and the taxpayer was required to deposit 25% of the disputed tax and file separate replies with supporting documents before fresh merits-based orders were passed. On the seigniorage-fee issue, substantive taxability was not decided; instead, the matter was deferred, a 10% deposit and replies were required, and separate orders were directed only after the Supreme Court resolves the reverse charge taxability question, leaving that controversy open.
GST assessment orders concerning short payment of tax and alleged non-payment on seigniorage fees under reverse charge mechanism were remitted for fresh adjudication. On the short-reported turnover issue, the impugned orders were treated as an addendum to the show cause notices, and the taxpayer was required to deposit 25% of the disputed tax and file separate replies with supporting documents before fresh merits-based orders were passed. On the seigniorage-fee issue, substantive taxability was not decided; instead, the matter was deferred, a 10% deposit and replies were required, and separate orders were directed only after the Supreme Court resolves the reverse charge taxability question, leaving that controversy open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.