Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
HC dismissed petitions challenging territorial jurisdiction of Additional Commissioner, Kanpur to adjudicate show cause notices (SCNs) issued by DGGI Ahmedabad under CGST Act. Petitioners contested jurisdiction based on Circular 169/2022 and Notification 2/2022, arguing Additional Commissioner lacked All-India jurisdiction. Court held that as per Notification 31/2018, Additional/Joint Commissioner has authority to determine tax liability for SCNs issued by DGGI. Court directed petitioners to raise jurisdictional and other contentions during adjudication proceedings, declining to exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 at this preliminary stage.
HC dismissed petitions challenging territorial jurisdiction of Additional Commissioner, Kanpur to adjudicate show cause notices (SCNs) issued by DGGI Ahmedabad under CGST Act. Petitioners contested jurisdiction based on Circular 169/2022 and Notification 2/2022, arguing Additional Commissioner lacked All-India jurisdiction. Court held that as per Notification 31/2018, Additional/Joint Commissioner has authority to determine tax liability for SCNs issued by DGGI. Court directed petitioners to raise jurisdictional and other contentions during adjudication proceedings, declining to exercise extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 at this preliminary stage.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.