Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
HC quashed the revisional order regarding maintainability u/s 108 of U.P. GST Act, 2017. The court clarified that Section 108(2) language "order has been subject to appeal" means an appeal must have been actually filed, not that appeal must be exhausted before seeking revision. The Revisional Authority's approach was contradictory - discussing merits while questioning maintainability. The order failed either as a merit-based decision (inadequate consideration of facts) or as a maintainability ruling (misinterpreting Section 108). The provision does not require exhaustion of appeal before revision petition. Matter remanded for fresh consideration of revision petition on merits.
HC quashed the revisional order regarding maintainability u/s 108 of U.P. GST Act, 2017. The court clarified that Section 108(2) language "order has been subject to appeal" means an appeal must have been actually filed, not that appeal must be exhausted before seeking revision. The Revisional Authority's approach was contradictory - discussing merits while questioning maintainability. The order failed either as a merit-based decision (inadequate consideration of facts) or as a maintainability ruling (misinterpreting Section 108). The provision does not require exhaustion of appeal before revision petition. Matter remanded for fresh consideration of revision petition on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
