Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Petitioner challenged assessment orders citing lack of jurisdiction, as entire duty liability was discharged from ITC availed at import. Court rejected jurisdiction challenge based on precedent, holding respondent competent to pass order under circular and GST Act provisions. However, petitioner failed to provide proper reply with tabulations and documents when show cause notice issued. Court set aside impugned order, remitting case for fresh order on merits, subject to petitioner depositing 10% of balance amount excluding defect relating to 100% ITC adjustment, and 1% of tax liability u/s 86(b) of GST Rules within 30 days. Petition allowed.
Petitioner challenged assessment orders citing lack of jurisdiction, as entire duty liability was discharged from ITC availed at import. Court rejected jurisdiction challenge based on precedent, holding respondent competent to pass order under circular and GST Act provisions. However, petitioner failed to provide proper reply with tabulations and documents when show cause notice issued. Court set aside impugned order, remitting case for fresh order on merits, subject to petitioner depositing 10% of balance amount excluding defect relating to 100% ITC adjustment, and 1% of tax liability u/s 86(b) of GST Rules within 30 days. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
