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...
Writ petitions seeking recovery of contractual deductions may be barred by limitation where each deduction creates a separate cause of action. The article explains that limitation for a recovery suit runs from the date of each deduction, rather than contract completion, where monthly invoices and payments do not establish a running account; pandemic-related limitation extensions cannot revive already time-barred claims. Invoking Article 226 cannot circumvent limitation, delay, or laches. It further notes that purely monetary contractual disputes involving disputed facts and requiring evidence should ordinarily be pursued through a civil suit. Accordingly, such refund claims are described as not maintainable in writ jurisdiction and liable to dismissal.
Writ petitions seeking recovery of contractual deductions may be barred by limitation where each deduction creates a separate cause of action. The article explains that limitation for a recovery suit runs from the date of each deduction, rather than contract completion, where monthly invoices and payments do not establish a running account; pandemic-related limitation extensions cannot revive already time-barred claims. Invoking Article 226 cannot circumvent limitation, delay, or laches. It further notes that purely monetary contractual disputes involving disputed facts and requiring evidence should ordinarily be pursued through a civil suit. Accordingly, such refund claims are described as not maintainable in writ jurisdiction and liable to dismissal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
