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...
The High Court held that the petitioner failed to establish lack of jurisdiction for issuance of the show cause notice (SCN) by the State Tax Authority, despite the absence of a notification u/s 6(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court opined that a notification is required only when restrictions or conditions are to be imposed on the exercise of power by officers appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act. However, considering the contrary view expressed by the Madras High Court in Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure, the matter was referred to a Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement.
The High Court held that the petitioner failed to establish lack of jurisdiction for issuance of the show cause notice (SCN) by the State Tax Authority, despite the absence of a notification u/s 6(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court opined that a notification is required only when restrictions or conditions are to be imposed on the exercise of power by officers appointed under the State Goods and Services Tax Act. However, considering the contrary view expressed by the Madras High Court in Tvl. Vardhan Infrastructure, the matter was referred to a Division Bench for an authoritative pronouncement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
