Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
