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...
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...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Seeking recovery of damages alongwith interest - Benefit of redemption of goods could not be availed as the goods were sold in the auction - Had the Commissioner (Appeals) been apprised of the fact that the goods were not in existence, a different order could have been passed. In this state of facts, it is not possible for us to direct the Respondents to pay damages to the Petitioner. The appropriate course of action would be to relegate the parties to the Commissioner (Appeals) to find the solution to the situation and treat the impugned order as an interim order in the appeal and the restoration of the appeal. - HC
Seeking recovery of damages alongwith interest - Benefit of redemption of goods could not be availed as the goods were sold in the auction - Had the Commissioner (Appeals) been apprised of the fact that the goods were not in existence, a different order could have been passed. In this state of facts, it is not possible for us to direct the Respondents to pay damages to the Petitioner. The appropriate course of action would be to relegate the parties to the Commissioner (Appeals) to find the solution to the situation and treat the impugned order as an interim order in the appeal and the restoration of the appeal. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
