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...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
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.