Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
The petitioner's refund claim was within the limitation period prescribed u/s 53(3) of the CGST Act, as the period from March 2020 to February 2022 was excluded from the limitation period based on the GST Council's recommendations, which the respondent did not dispute. The impugned order was set aside, and the HC allowed the present petition, holding that the petitioner's case was squarely covered by the GST Council's recommendations.
The petitioner's refund claim was within the limitation period prescribed u/s 53(3) of the CGST Act, as the period from March 2020 to February 2022 was excluded from the limitation period based on the GST Council's recommendations, which the respondent did not dispute. The impugned order was set aside, and the HC allowed the present petition, holding that the petitioner's case was squarely covered by the GST Council's recommendations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
