Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 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 dismissed the writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of clauses (c) & (d) of Section 17(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Supreme Court had previously upheld the validity of these clauses in the case of M/s Safari Retreats Private Ltd. However, the High Court granted liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue of whether the construction of immovable property carried out by the petitioner amounts to a 'plant' within the meaning of Section 17(5)(d) of the Act, subject to adjudication based on the facts and the functionality test laid down by the Supreme Court.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the constitutional validity of clauses (c) & (d) of Section 17(5) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Supreme Court had previously upheld the validity of these clauses in the case of M/s Safari Retreats Private Ltd. However, the High Court granted liberty to the petitioner to raise the issue of whether the construction of immovable property carried out by the petitioner amounts to a 'plant' within the meaning of Section 17(5)(d) of the Act, subject to adjudication based on the facts and the functionality test laid down by the Supreme Court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
