Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
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 
