Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
The High Court disposed of the petitioner's appeal challenging the impugned order and consequent summary of demand in Form GST APL-04. The court held that the petitioners may file an appeal once the president or state president of the appellate tribunal constituted u/s 107 of the Act of 2017 assumes office. Subject to depositing 20% of the remaining disputed tax amount, if not already deposited, in addition to the earlier deposit u/s 107(6) of the BGST Act, the petitioner must be granted the statutory benefit of stay u/s 112(9) of the BGST Act. The petitioner cannot be deprived of this benefit due to the respondents' failure to constitute the tribunal.
The High Court disposed of the petitioner's appeal challenging the impugned order and consequent summary of demand in Form GST APL-04. The court held that the petitioners may file an appeal once the president or state president of the appellate tribunal constituted u/s 107 of the Act of 2017 assumes office. Subject to depositing 20% of the remaining disputed tax amount, if not already deposited, in addition to the earlier deposit u/s 107(6) of the BGST Act, the petitioner must be granted the statutory benefit of stay u/s 112(9) of the BGST Act. The petitioner cannot be deprived of this benefit due to the respondents' failure to constitute the tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
