Faceless reassessment jurisdiction turned on retrospective AO definition, with later faceless-assessment changes treated as clarificatory and procedur...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2161 to 2180 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 without a saving or sunset clause ended its refund restriction for pending proceedings concerning integrated tax paid on exports. Proceedings under an omitted rule can continue only where a saving provision or statutory legal fiction preserves them. The GST Council's advisory recommendation for prospective omission did not bind the rule-making authority. The Supreme Court treated the omission as applicable to all pending refund proceedings, dismissed challenges to that application, and dismissed challenges to the rule's validity as infructuous.
Omission of Rule 96(10) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 without a saving or sunset clause ended its refund restriction for pending proceedings concerning integrated tax paid on exports. Proceedings under an omitted rule can continue only where a saving provision or statutory legal fiction preserves them. The GST Council's advisory recommendation for prospective omission did not bind the rule-making authority. The Supreme Court treated the omission as applicable to all pending refund proceedings, dismissed challenges to that application, and dismissed challenges to the rule's validity as infructuous.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.