Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The HC disposed of the petition challenging a GST assessment order characterized as non-speaking and violative of Section 75(6) of the GST Act. Rather than adjudicating on merits, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax) within two weeks, directing the appellate authority to entertain the appeal without reference to limitation periods and dispose of it within three months. The Court ordered status quo to be maintained in the interim. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds from the writ petition in the appeal, including violations of natural justice principles and the non-speaking nature of the impugned order.
The HC disposed of the petition challenging a GST assessment order characterized as non-speaking and violative of Section 75(6) of the GST Act. Rather than adjudicating on merits, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate Deputy Commissioner (State Tax) within two weeks, directing the appellate authority to entertain the appeal without reference to limitation periods and dispose of it within three months. The Court ordered status quo to be maintained in the interim. The petitioner was permitted to raise all grounds from the writ petition in the appeal, including violations of natural justice principles and the non-speaking nature of the impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
