Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Objective characteristics govern magnesium bis-glycinate chelate classification as an amino-acid coordination compound, not a food preparation or anti...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
581 to 600 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Validity of assessment order - mismatch between the GSTR 3B returns filed by the petitioner and the auto-populated GSTR 2A returns - The High court acknowledged the existence of difficulties arising from the mismatch between GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A returns, as evidenced by the issuance of Circular No.183. Despite the petitioner's non-participation in the assessment proceedings, the court considered the certificate from the Chartered Accountant provided by the petitioner and deemed it sufficient justification for interference with the impugned orders. - The court quashed the assessment orders and remanded the matters for reconsideration with the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand for each assessment period within 15 days.
Validity of assessment order - mismatch between the GSTR 3B returns filed by the petitioner and the auto-populated GSTR 2A returns - The High court acknowledged the existence of difficulties arising from the mismatch between GSTR 3B and GSTR 2A returns, as evidenced by the issuance of Circular No.183. Despite the petitioner's non-participation in the assessment proceedings, the court considered the certificate from the Chartered Accountant provided by the petitioner and deemed it sufficient justification for interference with the impugned orders. - The court quashed the assessment orders and remanded the matters for reconsideration with the condition that the petitioner remits 10% of the disputed tax demand for each assessment period within 15 days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
