Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC ruled against the promoter's attempt to deduct GST loss of Rs. 11,40,376/- from the refund amount following apartment cancellation. The court found no contractual provision in the Sale and Construction Agreements for GST deduction upon cancellation. The promoter's initial communication only mentioned 10% cancellation charges, revealing GST loss deduction only after the allottee refused to purchase an alternative apartment. The promoter failed to prove double GST payment for the same apartment. The court upheld the Appellate Tribunal's order allowing withdrawal of pre-deposit amount with accrued interest, directing the allottee to provide biweekly updates on refund application progress. Appeal dismissed.
HC ruled against the promoter's attempt to deduct GST loss of Rs. 11,40,376/- from the refund amount following apartment cancellation. The court found no contractual provision in the Sale and Construction Agreements for GST deduction upon cancellation. The promoter's initial communication only mentioned 10% cancellation charges, revealing GST loss deduction only after the allottee refused to purchase an alternative apartment. The promoter failed to prove double GST payment for the same apartment. The court upheld the Appellate Tribunal's order allowing withdrawal of pre-deposit amount with accrued interest, directing the allottee to provide biweekly updates on refund application progress. Appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.