Territorial jurisdiction in income-tax appeals follows the assessing officer's location, not the Tribunal's seat or a subsequent acquirer's registered...
Transfer pricing comparables must reflect functional similarity, with diverse activities and asset profiles supporting exclusion from contract service...
Real income in electricity distribution excludes surcharges and regulatory assets without reasonably certain recovery, while deductions require return...
Contempt for company bank account restraint breaches requires deliberate disobedience, while contempt appeals are limited to orders imposing punishmen...
Page of 4947
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
21 to 40 of 98935 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Input tax credit on reverse-charge services from an unregistered foreign supplier was held sustainable where the registered recipient raised a self-invoice under section 31 read with rule 36, discharged tax under section 9(3), and claimed credit under section 16(2)(a). The Court treated the self-invoice as the valid tax-paying document and rejected denial of credit merely because the foreign supplier's invoice referred to a particular unit. It also held that, during the relevant period, section 20 was an enabling provision for ITC distribution and did not require mandatory Input Service Distributor registration; the later amendment supported that view. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable, including on revenue-neutrality grounds.
Input tax credit on reverse-charge services from an unregistered foreign supplier was held sustainable where the registered recipient raised a self-invoice under section 31 read with rule 36, discharged tax under section 9(3), and claimed credit under section 16(2)(a). The Court treated the self-invoice as the valid tax-paying document and rejected denial of credit merely because the foreign supplier's invoice referred to a particular unit. It also held that, during the relevant period, section 20 was an enabling provision for ITC distribution and did not require mandatory Input Service Distributor registration; the later amendment supported that view. The demand and penalty were therefore unsustainable, including on revenue-neutrality grounds.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.