Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Objective characteristics and principal use govern mining-tyre classification, while fresh advance ruling applications may rely on additional technica...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
801 to 820 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Refund of Service Tax - time limitation - Exercise of power u/s 142(3) of GST Act for refund of service tax - The case involves the rejection of a refund claim by the Appellant based on limitation, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Appellant argues that the cause of action for refund arose upon refunding the service tax amount, not the payment date. Additionally, the Appellant contends that GST laws do not provide for the refund of service tax. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal over refund claims is also questioned, but it is established that the Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 142 of the CGST Act. The validity of refund applications is upheld by citing past decisions of the Tribunal.
Refund of Service Tax - time limitation - Exercise of power u/s 142(3) of GST Act for refund of service tax - The case involves the rejection of a refund claim by the Appellant based on limitation, which was upheld by the Commissioner (Appeals). The Appellant argues that the cause of action for refund arose upon refunding the service tax amount, not the payment date. Additionally, the Appellant contends that GST laws do not provide for the refund of service tax. The jurisdiction of the Tribunal over refund claims is also questioned, but it is established that the Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 142 of the CGST Act. The validity of refund applications is upheld by citing past decisions of the Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.