International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
The HC struck down para 2(2) of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022 as ultra vires Section 54 of the GST Act and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The circular had improperly applied restrictions from the 13.7.2022 notification to all refund applications filed after 13.7.2022, even for periods predating the notification. The Court found this created an arbitrary and discriminatory classification among assessees based solely on filing date, despite applications being within the statutory limitation period. Following its precedent in Ascent Meditech, the HC ruled that such artificial classification was impermissible, particularly as the notification itself had prospective effect commencing July 18, 2022. Petition allowed.
The HC struck down para 2(2) of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022 as ultra vires Section 54 of the GST Act and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The circular had improperly applied restrictions from the 13.7.2022 notification to all refund applications filed after 13.7.2022, even for periods predating the notification. The Court found this created an arbitrary and discriminatory classification among assessees based solely on filing date, despite applications being within the statutory limitation period. Following its precedent in Ascent Meditech, the HC ruled that such artificial classification was impermissible, particularly as the notification itself had prospective effect commencing July 18, 2022. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.