Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
The HC set aside the order dated 08.11.2023 regarding attachment of petitioner's bank property under CGST/KGST Act, 2017, remitting the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. Despite petitioner's failure to respond to pre-intimation notice and show cause notice, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, accepting petitioner's claim that non-compliance stemmed from bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The petitioner was granted one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice, with the Court imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the High Court Advocate Welfare Fund. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the order dated 08.11.2023 regarding attachment of petitioner's bank property under CGST/KGST Act, 2017, remitting the matter back to the first respondent for fresh consideration. Despite petitioner's failure to respond to pre-intimation notice and show cause notice, the Court adopted a justice-oriented approach, accepting petitioner's claim that non-compliance stemmed from bona fide reasons and unavoidable circumstances. The petitioner was granted one more opportunity to submit a reply to the show cause notice, with the Court imposing costs of Rs.10,000/- payable to the High Court Advocate Welfare Fund. The petition was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.