Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order issued u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The HC held that the correctness of reasons for invoking Section 74 cannot be examined in a writ proceeding as those involve disputed facts. The appropriate remedy against an order u/s 74 is to prefer an appeal u/s 107 of the Act. The HC refused to exercise writ jurisdiction despite reliance on an instruction indicating Section 74 proceedings can be invoked only in case of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the order issued u/s 74 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The HC held that the correctness of reasons for invoking Section 74 cannot be examined in a writ proceeding as those involve disputed facts. The appropriate remedy against an order u/s 74 is to prefer an appeal u/s 107 of the Act. The HC refused to exercise writ jurisdiction despite reliance on an instruction indicating Section 74 proceedings can be invoked only in case of fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts to evade tax.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
