Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC determined that the respondent authority misconstrued the GST notification's applicability. The court held that paragraph 3(iv) of the notification applies exclusively to pre-GST contracts and cannot be used to deny reimbursement for contracts executed after July 1, 2017, which are governed by paragraph 4. The HC directed the public works department secretary to revisit the petitioner's claim regarding GST payment against gross bills from July 1, 2017 to March 31, 2019, in accordance with GST law, effectively remanding the matter for reconsideration and potential reimbursement.
HC determined that the respondent authority misconstrued the GST notification's applicability. The court held that paragraph 3(iv) of the notification applies exclusively to pre-GST contracts and cannot be used to deny reimbursement for contracts executed after July 1, 2017, which are governed by paragraph 4. The HC directed the public works department secretary to revisit the petitioner's claim regarding GST payment against gross bills from July 1, 2017 to March 31, 2019, in accordance with GST law, effectively remanding the matter for reconsideration and potential reimbursement.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
