Revenue neutrality in domestic related-party loans can require deletion of interest transfer pricing adjustments after domestic-transaction verificati...
Pre-enactment land-sale agreements escape stamp-duty value substitution where substantial banking-channel consideration was received before Section 43...
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.