Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
E-rickshaw supplies in CKD/SKD form qualify for GST treatment as the finished electrically operated vehicle only when all components needed to assemble a complete vehicle are supplied together as one identifiable kit or package, and the consignment contents and contemporaneous commercial records consistently match that description. The AAAR rejected the motor-plus-three-components test because it does not arise from Rule 2(a), the tariff, or the rate notification, and held that individual parts cannot be classified as the finished vehicle merely because some are essential components. It also noted that customs interpretative fiction under Rule 2(a) has a limited scope and cannot be extended beyond customs classification.
E-rickshaw supplies in CKD/SKD form qualify for GST treatment as the finished electrically operated vehicle only when all components needed to assemble a complete vehicle are supplied together as one identifiable kit or package, and the consignment contents and contemporaneous commercial records consistently match that description. The AAAR rejected the motor-plus-three-components test because it does not arise from Rule 2(a), the tariff, or the rate notification, and held that individual parts cannot be classified as the finished vehicle merely because some are essential components. It also noted that customs interpretative fiction under Rule 2(a) has a limited scope and cannot be extended beyond customs classification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.