Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
HC determined directors' liability for GST non-compliance, finding Section 107 and 122(1A) of CGST Act applicable. The Court held that directors must be held responsible for fraudulent ITC availing and non-filing of returns, with the caveat that specific individual responsibilities require detailed factual scrutiny. The HC directed the Department to communicate appellate remedies within two weeks, mandating that any appeal filed within 30 days shall be adjudicated on merits without limitation bar. The core issue involves determining which directors retained transactional benefits and their precise organizational roles in potential tax irregularities.
HC determined directors' liability for GST non-compliance, finding Section 107 and 122(1A) of CGST Act applicable. The Court held that directors must be held responsible for fraudulent ITC availing and non-filing of returns, with the caveat that specific individual responsibilities require detailed factual scrutiny. The HC directed the Department to communicate appellate remedies within two weeks, mandating that any appeal filed within 30 days shall be adjudicated on merits without limitation bar. The core issue involves determining which directors retained transactional benefits and their precise organizational roles in potential tax irregularities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.