Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The petitioner challenged the order and summary order alleging discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, and excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner agreed to pay 10% of the disputed tax to file reply/objections with supporting documents. The High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the disputed tax within four weeks. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
The petitioner challenged the order and summary order alleging discrepancies between GSTR-1 and GSTR-3B, and excess availment of Input Tax Credit (ITC). The petitioner agreed to pay 10% of the disputed tax to file reply/objections with supporting documents. The High Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, subject to the petitioner paying 10% of the disputed tax within four weeks. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
