Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Seeking activation of GSTIN and granting final certificate of registration to the Petitioners from 01.07.2017 - The case involved a dispute regarding the activation of the petitioner's GSTIN under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. Technical glitches initially resulted in the linkage of the petitioner's GSTIN to the PAN of a partnership firm instead of the proprietor's PAN. As a consequence, the petitioner faced challenges in availing input tax credit for purchases made during the transition period. - The High Court found merit in the petitioner's argument, ruling that they were not responsible for the initial technical errors. The Court ordered the activation of the correct GSTIN with retroactive effect from July 1, 2017, allowing the petitioner to avail input tax credit for the relevant period.
Seeking activation of GSTIN and granting final certificate of registration to the Petitioners from 01.07.2017 - The case involved a dispute regarding the activation of the petitioner's GSTIN under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime. Technical glitches initially resulted in the linkage of the petitioner's GSTIN to the PAN of a partnership firm instead of the proprietor's PAN. As a consequence, the petitioner faced challenges in availing input tax credit for purchases made during the transition period. - The High Court found merit in the petitioner's argument, ruling that they were not responsible for the initial technical errors. The Court ordered the activation of the correct GSTIN with retroactive effect from July 1, 2017, allowing the petitioner to avail input tax credit for the relevant period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
