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 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
821 to 840 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
IGST refund on exports cannot be confined to a request to amend shipping bills under Section 149 when an independent refund prayer under Rule 96 is on record. The refund rejection was set aside because the authority considered only the alleged lack of contemporaneous evidence for amendment and failed to examine the refund claim on its own merits. As export of goods and payment of IGST were undisputed, and none of the Rule 96(4) withholding contingencies applied, the refund had to be processed under the statutory refund mechanism; the amendment issue was left open.
IGST refund on exports cannot be confined to a request to amend shipping bills under Section 149 when an independent refund prayer under Rule 96 is on record. The refund rejection was set aside because the authority considered only the alleged lack of contemporaneous evidence for amendment and failed to examine the refund claim on its own merits. As export of goods and payment of IGST were undisputed, and none of the Rule 96(4) withholding contingencies applied, the refund had to be processed under the statutory refund mechanism; the amendment issue was left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.