Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
HC determined that holographic stickers supplied by the Prohibition and Excise Department constitute "goods" under Section 2(52) of GST laws, not services. The supply cannot be classified as a "composite supply" with excise licensing. The petitioner's previous RCM tax payments were made erroneously, as the stickers are not taxable supplies under Section 2(108). The court rejected the respondents' estoppel argument, affirming that tax principles are not bound by past practices. The second respondent must process refund claims under Section 54 of GST Acts and Rule 89 of GST rules within 3 months. The petition was allowed, granting refund of GST paid under reverse charge mechanism for holographic sticker procurement.
HC determined that holographic stickers supplied by the Prohibition and Excise Department constitute "goods" under Section 2(52) of GST laws, not services. The supply cannot be classified as a "composite supply" with excise licensing. The petitioner's previous RCM tax payments were made erroneously, as the stickers are not taxable supplies under Section 2(108). The court rejected the respondents' estoppel argument, affirming that tax principles are not bound by past practices. The second respondent must process refund claims under Section 54 of GST Acts and Rule 89 of GST rules within 3 months. The petition was allowed, granting refund of GST paid under reverse charge mechanism for holographic sticker procurement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
