Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Levy of GST - activity of holding equity capital by the parent Company in the Petitioner - ultravires Section 5 of the IGST Act, 2017 read with Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 or not - The High Court concluded that mere holding of shares by a holding company in its subsidiary cannot be classified as a supply of service, as clarified by circulars issued by both the Central and State Governments. The court held that such activity does not fall within the purview of GST. - Given the similarity of the present case to the referenced judgment, the High Court held that the impugned Show Cause Notices were without jurisdiction or authority of law. Consequently, the court quashed the notices issued by the respondent.
Levy of GST - activity of holding equity capital by the parent Company in the Petitioner - ultravires Section 5 of the IGST Act, 2017 read with Section 7 of the CGST Act, 2017 or not - The High Court concluded that mere holding of shares by a holding company in its subsidiary cannot be classified as a supply of service, as clarified by circulars issued by both the Central and State Governments. The court held that such activity does not fall within the purview of GST. - Given the similarity of the present case to the referenced judgment, the High Court held that the impugned Show Cause Notices were without jurisdiction or authority of law. Consequently, the court quashed the notices issued by the respondent.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
