Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
The AAR encountered conflicting interpretations regarding the classification of job work under Section 2(68) of the CGST Act and the nature of service supply under Section 7(1A) read with Schedule-II. Due to fundamental disagreements between authority members on the tariff classification and applicable GST rate, the matter was formally referred to the Appellate Authority in Jaipur as per Section 98(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, without reaching a definitive substantive ruling on the underlying legal questions presented by the applicant.
The AAR encountered conflicting interpretations regarding the classification of job work under Section 2(68) of the CGST Act and the nature of service supply under Section 7(1A) read with Schedule-II. Due to fundamental disagreements between authority members on the tariff classification and applicable GST rate, the matter was formally referred to the Appellate Authority in Jaipur as per Section 98(5) of the CGST Act, 2017, without reaching a definitive substantive ruling on the underlying legal questions presented by the applicant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.