Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Wrongful availment of input tax credit, where credit exceeded GSTR-2A and was utilised in GSTR-3B, was treated as prima facie suppression of facts with intent to evade tax, supporting invocation of the extended limitation under GST. The Court also noted an apparent failure to discharge reverse charge liability on commissions from foreign booking agencies. The limitation challenge was rejected as covered by the earlier Madras High Court ruling in Tata Play Limited, and the Court further observed that, for the relevant assessment years, even the period for passing orders under the lesser limitation regime had not expired. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Wrongful availment of input tax credit, where credit exceeded GSTR-2A and was utilised in GSTR-3B, was treated as prima facie suppression of facts with intent to evade tax, supporting invocation of the extended limitation under GST. The Court also noted an apparent failure to discharge reverse charge liability on commissions from foreign booking agencies. The limitation challenge was rejected as covered by the earlier Madras High Court ruling in Tata Play Limited, and the Court further observed that, for the relevant assessment years, even the period for passing orders under the lesser limitation regime had not expired. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.