Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
The HC held that the four-year limitation period u/s 64 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, pertains to the initiation of revisional proceedings by the Additional Commissioner and not the passing of the final order. In the instant case, the revisional proceedings were initiated within the four-year period from the original order's date, and thus, the Additional Commissioner had jurisdiction to pass the revisional order, even after the expiry of four years from the original order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.