TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
Detention of goods - E-way bills expired - Constitutional validity of Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 - deposit of tax again, once the tax is already paid - the petitioner could not able to show that the provisions of the enactments-in-question are unreasonable or the object of these enactments are to destroy a fundamental right/ constitutional right. - However, the respondents have completely failed to show that the petitioner was indeed, given an opportunity of being heard before the passing the orders of the confiscation in Form GST MOV-11. The confiscation orders dated 23.04.2021, passed under Section 130 in Form GST MOV-11, are not found to be passed in accordance with law. - Goods and vehicle to be released on furnishing of bond - HC
Detention of goods - E-way bills expired - Constitutional validity of Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 - deposit of tax again, once the tax is already paid - the petitioner could not able to show that the provisions of the enactments-in-question are unreasonable or the object of these enactments are to destroy a fundamental right/ constitutional right. - However, the respondents have completely failed to show that the petitioner was indeed, given an opportunity of being heard before the passing the orders of the confiscation in Form GST MOV-11. The confiscation orders dated 23.04.2021, passed under Section 130 in Form GST MOV-11, are not found to be passed in accordance with law. - Goods and vehicle to be released on furnishing of bond - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.