Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
Indirect corporate control can create related-party status, excluding financial creditors from Committee of Creditors representation, participation an...
Page of 4881
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 97618 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 demand of GST raised by State authorities - For the same cause of action, the Central Authority has already initiated action - The petitioner contested the order on the grounds of prior proceedings initiated by the Central Authority and alleged lack of timely information provided to the State authorities. The Court found merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the invalidity of the Demand Order due to prior proceedings and dismissed the State authorities' claims of lack of information. Additionally, the Court rejected reliance on a circular mandate as sufficient justification for the State authorities' actions. Consequently, the High Court set aside/quashed the impugned Demand Order.
Validity of demand of GST raised by State authorities - For the same cause of action, the Central Authority has already initiated action - The petitioner contested the order on the grounds of prior proceedings initiated by the Central Authority and alleged lack of timely information provided to the State authorities. The Court found merit in the petitioner's argument regarding the invalidity of the Demand Order due to prior proceedings and dismissed the State authorities' claims of lack of information. Additionally, the Court rejected reliance on a circular mandate as sufficient justification for the State authorities' actions. Consequently, the High Court set aside/quashed the impugned Demand Order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
