Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Page of 4782
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95636 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The Telangana High Court addressed a case involving the recovery...
Refund: HC noted the argument that once an order is passed u/s 54, it can only be annulled in appeal or revision. No coercive action till next hearing.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The Telangana High Court addressed a case involving the recovery of a refund due to a misclassification of the supply of a solar power generating system. The petitioner argued that an order under u/s 54 of the CGST Act can only be annulled through an appeal u/s 107 or revision u/s 108. Citing a precedent, the court held that unless the Annexure-I certificate is cancelled following the procedure u/r 35E, invoking u/s 11A is impermissible. The court noted the submissions that the show cause notices as without jurisdiction and ordered no coercive action against the petitioner until the next hearing scheduled for 22.07.2024.
The Telangana High Court addressed a case involving the recovery of a refund due to a misclassification of the supply of a solar power generating system. The petitioner argued that an order under u/s 54 of the CGST Act can only be annulled through an appeal u/s 107 or revision u/s 108. Citing a precedent, the court held that unless the Annexure-I certificate is cancelled following the procedure u/r 35E, invoking u/s 11A is impermissible. The court noted the submissions that the show cause notices as without jurisdiction and ordered no coercive action against the petitioner until the next hearing scheduled for 22.07.2024.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
