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...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
