Omitted specified domestic transaction provision invalidates related-party expenditure transfer-pricing references and assessments based on consequent...
Preventive suspension requires an immediate continuing threat and cannot become indefinite without inquiry, fresh evidence, or proportionate safeguard...
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.