Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court rectified its previous order, holding that Notification No. 54/2018 Central Tax shall apply prospectively from 9th October 2018 only. Consequently, the show cause notice dated 31.03.2023, issued on the basis of retrospective operation of the said Notification for the period prior to 9.10.2018, was quashed as being without jurisdiction. The amount quantified towards alleged erroneous refund for the period before 9.10.2018 would not survive, as the Notification would be applicable prospectively. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
The High Court rectified its previous order, holding that Notification No. 54/2018 Central Tax shall apply prospectively from 9th October 2018 only. Consequently, the show cause notice dated 31.03.2023, issued on the basis of retrospective operation of the said Notification for the period prior to 9.10.2018, was quashed as being without jurisdiction. The amount quantified towards alleged erroneous refund for the period before 9.10.2018 would not survive, as the Notification would be applicable prospectively. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.