Business deductions and transfer pricing issues: tribunal treatment of software write-offs, donation receipts, warranty provisions, and related expens...
Equivalent value attachment under money laundering law upheld where received funds were treated as proceeds of crime and prior-acquired property could...
The petitioners failed to reflect the remittance of Goods and Services Tax (GST) in their GSTR returns due to technical reasons, and there was a lack of clear proof of payment of consideration and tax towards the inward supply. The court granted liberty to the petitioners to claim the benefit of the relevant circulars, namely, Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022 and Circular No. 193/05/2023-GST dated 17.07.2023, within one month before the appropriate authority. The authority shall examine the claim of the individual dealer and process the claim accordingly, following the reasoning, observations, and conclusions recorded in the cited judgment and connected matters.
The petitioners failed to reflect the remittance of Goods and Services Tax (GST) in their GSTR returns due to technical reasons, and there was a lack of clear proof of payment of consideration and tax towards the inward supply. The court granted liberty to the petitioners to claim the benefit of the relevant circulars, namely, Circular No. 183/15/2022-GST dated 27.12.2022 and Circular No. 193/05/2023-GST dated 17.07.2023, within one month before the appropriate authority. The authority shall examine the claim of the individual dealer and process the claim accordingly, following the reasoning, observations, and conclusions recorded in the cited judgment and connected matters.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
