Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
HC determined that Notification No. 54/2018-Central Tax amending Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules operates prospectively from October 9, 2018, not retrospectively from October 23, 2017. The court quashed summons, notices, and recovery proceedings initiated based on retrospective application of the notification. Any quantification of alleged erroneous refunds for periods before October 9, 2018, was held invalid and without jurisdiction. The ruling aligned with previous rectification order in Cosmo Films Limited case which corrected the earlier misinterpretation regarding notification's effective date. The decision establishes clear temporal boundaries for enforcement of amended Rule 96(10).
HC determined that Notification No. 54/2018-Central Tax amending Rule 96(10) of CGST Rules operates prospectively from October 9, 2018, not retrospectively from October 23, 2017. The court quashed summons, notices, and recovery proceedings initiated based on retrospective application of the notification. Any quantification of alleged erroneous refunds for periods before October 9, 2018, was held invalid and without jurisdiction. The ruling aligned with previous rectification order in Cosmo Films Limited case which corrected the earlier misinterpretation regarding notification's effective date. The decision establishes clear temporal boundaries for enforcement of amended Rule 96(10).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.