Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
