Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
HC quashed orders imposing tax and penalty under section 130 of GST Act arising from stock discrepancies discovered during business premises survey. Following established precedents, the Court held that mere stock discrepancies identified during survey warrant proceedings under sections 73/74 rather than section 130 of GST Act. The authority's direct invocation of section 130 was deemed legally unsustainable. The impugned orders dated 02.04.2024 by Additional Commissioner and 10.09.2018 read with 05.08.2020 by respondent authority were set aside, with the petition being allowed in favor of the registered dealer.
HC quashed orders imposing tax and penalty under section 130 of GST Act arising from stock discrepancies discovered during business premises survey. Following established precedents, the Court held that mere stock discrepancies identified during survey warrant proceedings under sections 73/74 rather than section 130 of GST Act. The authority's direct invocation of section 130 was deemed legally unsustainable. The impugned orders dated 02.04.2024 by Additional Commissioner and 10.09.2018 read with 05.08.2020 by respondent authority were set aside, with the petition being allowed in favor of the registered dealer.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
