Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Refund claim rejected solely on non-compliance of time limit u/s 34(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Appellant authority noted facts, grounds, submissions but dismissed appeal without addressing misinterpretation of Section 34(2) raised by appellants. High Court quashed orders of authorities, remanded matter to consider refund application u/s 54 based on documents, undisputed TPL certificate, and pass order in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Refund claim rejected solely on non-compliance of time limit u/s 34(2) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Appellant authority noted facts, grounds, submissions but dismissed appeal without addressing misinterpretation of Section 34(2) raised by appellants. High Court quashed orders of authorities, remanded matter to consider refund application u/s 54 based on documents, undisputed TPL certificate, and pass order in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
