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 partially allowed the petition challenging GST late fee and penalty impositions. Court upheld late fee under Section 47(2) of GST Act for delayed annual return filing, which mandates Rs.100 per day subject to maximum 0.25% of state turnover. However, HC struck down additional general penalty of Rs.50,000 each under Section 125 for CGST and SGST, ruling that when specific penalty provision exists as late fee under Section 47, imposing general penalty is improper. Court confirmed respondent authority's jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for non-filing but emphasized that penalty cannot be duplicated through both late fee and general penalty provisions.
HC partially allowed the petition challenging GST late fee and penalty impositions. Court upheld late fee under Section 47(2) of GST Act for delayed annual return filing, which mandates Rs.100 per day subject to maximum 0.25% of state turnover. However, HC struck down additional general penalty of Rs.50,000 each under Section 125 for CGST and SGST, ruling that when specific penalty provision exists as late fee under Section 47, imposing general penalty is improper. Court confirmed respondent authority's jurisdiction to initiate proceedings for non-filing but emphasized that penalty cannot be duplicated through both late fee and general penalty provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.