Trademark depreciation and section 14A adjustments: ITAT applies consistency, independent book-profit computation, and no disallowance without exempt ...
Rebuttable search presumptions and corroboration standards shaped deletion of unsubstantiated additions, while rental income and limited profit estima...
The High Court examined a challenge against a notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, questioning its validity u/s 168(A) of the CGST Act, 2017 due to lack of GST Council recommendation. The court found the notification prima facie inconsistent with the law, indicating potential failure of actions based on it. An assessment of force majeure applicability in light of GST Council meeting minutes was deemed necessary, with authorities given a chance to present their stance and evidence. Pending further notice, petitioners were granted interim protection against coercive measures based on the contested assessment order. Respondents were instructed to submit affidavits by a specified date for further proceedings.
The High Court examined a challenge against a notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, questioning its validity u/s 168(A) of the CGST Act, 2017 due to lack of GST Council recommendation. The court found the notification prima facie inconsistent with the law, indicating potential failure of actions based on it. An assessment of force majeure applicability in light of GST Council meeting minutes was deemed necessary, with authorities given a chance to present their stance and evidence. Pending further notice, petitioners were granted interim protection against coercive measures based on the contested assessment order. Respondents were instructed to submit affidavits by a specified date for further proceedings.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
