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...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
