Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The applicant sought regular bail for allegedly illegally claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) through fake firms without conducting any business or supply of goods, contravening provisions of the CGST Act. Statements recorded u/s 136 of the CGST Act were considered relevant. Evidence showed the applicant operated multiple firms on a single PAN, claiming ITC without actual business operations. Citing the ARNESH KUMAR case, the High Court noted that the applicant's detention was unjustified as investigations were completed and the maximum punishment was five years. The bail application was granted, subject to specified conditions.
The applicant sought regular bail for allegedly illegally claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) through fake firms without conducting any business or supply of goods, contravening provisions of the CGST Act. Statements recorded u/s 136 of the CGST Act were considered relevant. Evidence showed the applicant operated multiple firms on a single PAN, claiming ITC without actual business operations. Citing the ARNESH KUMAR case, the High Court noted that the applicant's detention was unjustified as investigations were completed and the maximum punishment was five years. The bail application was granted, subject to specified conditions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
