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...
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.