Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Principles of natural justice violated due to errors apparent on record. Petitioner claimed inability to respond or participate due to unawareness of proceedings. Court held that tax computation erred by considering total turnover instead of turnover difference between profit and loss account and GSTR 9. Petitioner's explanation of unawareness unacceptable for a large corporate entity. However, substantial liability imposed without considering GSTR 9C reconciliation statement. Cumulatively, opportunity granted to petitioner to contest tax demand by remitting Rs.2.50 crore within four weeks and submitting reply with relevant documents. Impugned order set aside subject to compliance. Petition disposed of.
Principles of natural justice violated due to errors apparent on record. Petitioner claimed inability to respond or participate due to unawareness of proceedings. Court held that tax computation erred by considering total turnover instead of turnover difference between profit and loss account and GSTR 9. Petitioner's explanation of unawareness unacceptable for a large corporate entity. However, substantial liability imposed without considering GSTR 9C reconciliation statement. Cumulatively, opportunity granted to petitioner to contest tax demand by remitting Rs.2.50 crore within four weeks and submitting reply with relevant documents. Impugned order set aside subject to compliance. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.