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...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
HC determined that the petitioner is an independent service provider, not an intermediary under IGST Act. Services rendered to overseas recipients constitute export of services exempt from GST liability. The court quashed the appellate authority's order dated 01.09.2023, restored the original order dated 28.07.2022 granting refund for April and May 2022, and held that refund claims under Section 54 of CGST Act are maintainable and not time-barred. The petition was consequently allowed, affirming the petitioner's right to claim GST refund.
HC determined that the petitioner is an independent service provider, not an intermediary under IGST Act. Services rendered to overseas recipients constitute export of services exempt from GST liability. The court quashed the appellate authority's order dated 01.09.2023, restored the original order dated 28.07.2022 granting refund for April and May 2022, and held that refund claims under Section 54 of CGST Act are maintainable and not time-barred. The petition was consequently allowed, affirming the petitioner's right to claim GST refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
