Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
The HC ruled that collection of cess by respondent authorities under the Assam Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1972 post-GST implementation was unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and AGST Act, 2017. Following the precedent established in M/s. Bhatter Traders, which involved pari materia issues, the Court disposed of the writ petition in favor of the petitioner. The judgment effectively invalidates the respondent authorities' power to levy and collect such cess in the GST regime, rendering their actions unlawful and establishing grounds for the petitioner's refund claim.
The HC ruled that collection of cess by respondent authorities under the Assam Agricultural Produce Market Act, 1972 post-GST implementation was unconstitutional and ultra vires to the provisions of the CGST Act, 2017 and AGST Act, 2017. Following the precedent established in M/s. Bhatter Traders, which involved pari materia issues, the Court disposed of the writ petition in favor of the petitioner. The judgment effectively invalidates the respondent authorities' power to levy and collect such cess in the GST regime, rendering their actions unlawful and establishing grounds for the petitioner's refund claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
