Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
HC declined to intervene in challenge against ITC blocking u/r 86A(1) of Kerala GST Rules and show cause notice u/s 74 of CGST/KSGST Act. Court determined allegations of fraudulent transactions using fake invoices and supply without actual movement of goods involved disputed factual matters unsuitable for writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Petitioner directed to pursue statutory remedies before designated authorities. The existence of specific allegations regarding fraudulent conduct and fake invoices placed the matter outside scope of constitutional writ jurisdiction, necessitating resolution through prescribed administrative channels.
HC declined to intervene in challenge against ITC blocking u/r 86A(1) of Kerala GST Rules and show cause notice u/s 74 of CGST/KSGST Act. Court determined allegations of fraudulent transactions using fake invoices and supply without actual movement of goods involved disputed factual matters unsuitable for writ jurisdiction under Article 226. Petitioner directed to pursue statutory remedies before designated authorities. The existence of specific allegations regarding fraudulent conduct and fake invoices placed the matter outside scope of constitutional writ jurisdiction, necessitating resolution through prescribed administrative channels.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.