Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Reversal of ITC - The High Court found that certain findings recorded by the adjudicating authority were outside the scope of the allegations in the show-cause notice. The authority had admitted that the appellant made payment of tax to the supplier against the transaction, but failed to remit the tax to the State exchequer. However, the court deemed it arbitrary to penalize the appellant without first conducting an enquiry with the supplier. - The Court reiterated the conditions prescribed in Section 16 (2) of the Act for a dealer to be eligible to avail credit of any input tax. - The Court highlighted the importance of action against the selling dealer before directing the appellant to reverse the input tax credit. It emphasized that unless exceptional circumstances exist, proceedings should be initiated against the supplier first.
Reversal of ITC - The High Court found that certain findings recorded by the adjudicating authority were outside the scope of the allegations in the show-cause notice. The authority had admitted that the appellant made payment of tax to the supplier against the transaction, but failed to remit the tax to the State exchequer. However, the court deemed it arbitrary to penalize the appellant without first conducting an enquiry with the supplier. - The Court reiterated the conditions prescribed in Section 16 (2) of the Act for a dealer to be eligible to avail credit of any input tax. - The Court highlighted the importance of action against the selling dealer before directing the appellant to reverse the input tax credit. It emphasized that unless exceptional circumstances exist, proceedings should be initiated against the supplier first.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
