Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
This case pertains to the denial of a GST claim for differential tax liability arising from increased prices of materials and wages. The respondent, BUIDCo, expressed no objection to remanding the matter to the concerned authority for fresh consideration. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 16.11.2019 and remanded the matter to the Chief General Manager of BUIDCo (Respondent No. 3) to consider the representation dated 27.06.2019 (Annexure P5) and pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
This case pertains to the denial of a GST claim for differential tax liability arising from increased prices of materials and wages. The respondent, BUIDCo, expressed no objection to remanding the matter to the concerned authority for fresh consideration. Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order dated 16.11.2019 and remanded the matter to the Chief General Manager of BUIDCo (Respondent No. 3) to consider the representation dated 27.06.2019 (Annexure P5) and pass necessary orders strictly in accordance with the law. The petition was disposed of by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.