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...
Petitioner deposited amount under alleged coercion and protest, claiming inadmissible Input Tax Credit availed. Respondent disputed coercion, stating voluntary deposit. Court observed deposits not made during raid or custody, but under alleged threat of cancellation of registration. Petitioner could have availed remedies against such threats. Court deemed enquiry into coercion or voluntary deposit unnecessary, noting petitioner can seek refund if excess tax deposited, in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.
Petitioner deposited amount under alleged coercion and protest, claiming inadmissible Input Tax Credit availed. Respondent disputed coercion, stating voluntary deposit. Court observed deposits not made during raid or custody, but under alleged threat of cancellation of registration. Petitioner could have availed remedies against such threats. Court deemed enquiry into coercion or voluntary deposit unnecessary, noting petitioner can seek refund if excess tax deposited, in accordance with law. Petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.