Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Finality of an earlier judicial determination prevented the Department from reopening the applicable compounding guidelines when calculating the compounding fee. The article explains that a direction to quantify the fee required calculation rather than fresh adjudication, and that statutory instructions on compounding could not displace a binding inter partes finding that the 2008 CBDT Guidelines governed the application. It further notes that the 2024 Guidelines on fresh applications were limited to applications rejected for specified curable defects and did not cover applications rejected on merits. The fee was therefore to be recomputed under the 2008 Guidelines after crediting the amount already paid.
Finality of an earlier judicial determination prevented the Department from reopening the applicable compounding guidelines when calculating the compounding fee. The article explains that a direction to quantify the fee required calculation rather than fresh adjudication, and that statutory instructions on compounding could not displace a binding inter partes finding that the 2008 CBDT Guidelines governed the application. It further notes that the 2024 Guidelines on fresh applications were limited to applications rejected for specified curable defects and did not cover applications rejected on merits. The fee was therefore to be recomputed under the 2008 Guidelines after crediting the amount already paid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
