Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Petitioner's GST registration was cancelled as petitioner had stopped business at registered premises and issued fake invoices without actual supply of goods. Original authority found petitioner not conducting business at registered premises based on landlord's statement that premises were leased out to petitioner for iron and steel business from 2012 to May 2017, but thereafter no business conducted and premises leased to another person unrelated to petitioner. Original authority held details provided during VAT to GST migration were false, warranting cancellation of registration. Appellate authority upheld cancellation. High Court found no reason to interfere with findings, noting petitioner can apply for fresh registration if intending to restart business. Writ petition dismissed.
Petitioner's GST registration was cancelled as petitioner had stopped business at registered premises and issued fake invoices without actual supply of goods. Original authority found petitioner not conducting business at registered premises based on landlord's statement that premises were leased out to petitioner for iron and steel business from 2012 to May 2017, but thereafter no business conducted and premises leased to another person unrelated to petitioner. Original authority held details provided during VAT to GST migration were false, warranting cancellation of registration. Appellate authority upheld cancellation. High Court found no reason to interfere with findings, noting petitioner can apply for fresh registration if intending to restart business. Writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
