Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The HC held that considering the declaration issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited stating they had discharged GST liability under RCM on services availed from the appellant, the appellant would be entitled to take advantage of the same. The matter was remanded back to the original authority for re-adjudication considering this subsequent development. The HC observed that while issuing show-cause notice, the Assessing Officer had relied upon an Advance Ruling Authority decision which held that the activity in question was not covered under SAC 9991 and should be taxed at 18%. The orders of the Appellate and Original Authorities were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC held that considering the declaration issued by Indian Oil Corporation Limited stating they had discharged GST liability under RCM on services availed from the appellant, the appellant would be entitled to take advantage of the same. The matter was remanded back to the original authority for re-adjudication considering this subsequent development. The HC observed that while issuing show-cause notice, the Assessing Officer had relied upon an Advance Ruling Authority decision which held that the activity in question was not covered under SAC 9991 and should be taxed at 18%. The orders of the Appellate and Original Authorities were set aside, and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.