Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Respondent failed to reduce, re-fix and display MRPS commensurately after GST rate reduction on impacted SKUs w.e.f. 15.11.2017 and convey the same to dealers, thereby not passing on tax reduction benefit to consumers in violation of Section 171 of GST Act as per Delhi HC judgment [2024 (1) TMI 1248]. DGAP report stating no violation cannot be accepted. DGAP directed to reinvestigate case as per HC judgment and submit report u/r 133(4) of CGST Rules, 2017.
Respondent failed to reduce, re-fix and display MRPS commensurately after GST rate reduction on impacted SKUs w.e.f. 15.11.2017 and convey the same to dealers, thereby not passing on tax reduction benefit to consumers in violation of Section 171 of GST Act as per Delhi HC judgment [2024 (1) TMI 1248]. DGAP report stating no violation cannot be accepted. DGAP directed to reinvestigate case as per HC judgment and submit report u/r 133(4) of CGST Rules, 2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
