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...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Approved insolvency resolution plan waivers of indirect-tax liabilities did not extend to GST liabilities arising after 1 April 2022. The cited Supreme Court precedent on the binding effect of resolution plans was inapplicable on the stated facts, while a High Court ruling was identified as clarifying the position. The challenge based on the resolution plan was not accepted; the taxpayer could pursue the statutory appeal on meeting the prescribed pre-deposit requirement.
Approved insolvency resolution plan waivers of indirect-tax liabilities did not extend to GST liabilities arising after 1 April 2022. The cited Supreme Court precedent on the binding effect of resolution plans was inapplicable on the stated facts, while a High Court ruling was identified as clarifying the position. The challenge based on the resolution plan was not accepted; the taxpayer could pursue the statutory appeal on meeting the prescribed pre-deposit requirement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
