Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Interpretation of statute - word ‘or’ is used in section 75(4) of the UPGST Act, 2017 - opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded - Relying on statutory interpretation and judicial precedents, the High court affirms that the mandatory nature of providing a personal hearing is clear under Section 75(4) of the UPGST Act, 2017, irrespective of whether a request for such a hearing is made by the affected party. - The court quashes the orders passed by the authorities and directs the respondent to grant the petitioner a proper opportunity for a personal hearing before passing any further orders.
Interpretation of statute - word ‘or’ is used in section 75(4) of the UPGST Act, 2017 - opportunity of personal hearing was not afforded - Relying on statutory interpretation and judicial precedents, the High court affirms that the mandatory nature of providing a personal hearing is clear under Section 75(4) of the UPGST Act, 2017, irrespective of whether a request for such a hearing is made by the affected party. - The court quashes the orders passed by the authorities and directs the respondent to grant the petitioner a proper opportunity for a personal hearing before passing any further orders.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.