Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1221 to 1240 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAAR set aside the impugned ruling dated 30.5.2024 and remanded the matter back to the GAAR for fresh decision. The case concerned whether services of preparing plans, estimates, and Draft Tender Plans for building work provided to the R&B department of Gujarat Government constituted "pure services" related to Panchayat or Municipality functions under Articles 243G or 243W of the Constitution. The AAAR determined it had authority to confirm or modify rulings under section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017, drawing parallels to similar provisions in the Central Excise Act and Finance Act, with support from Gujarat HC precedent in Commissioner of Central Excise vs Medico Labs.
The AAAR set aside the impugned ruling dated 30.5.2024 and remanded the matter back to the GAAR for fresh decision. The case concerned whether services of preparing plans, estimates, and Draft Tender Plans for building work provided to the R&B department of Gujarat Government constituted "pure services" related to Panchayat or Municipality functions under Articles 243G or 243W of the Constitution. The AAAR determined it had authority to confirm or modify rulings under section 101 of the CGST Act, 2017, drawing parallels to similar provisions in the Central Excise Act and Finance Act, with support from Gujarat HC precedent in Commissioner of Central Excise vs Medico Labs.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.