Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
861 to 880 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC partly allowed the writ petition challenging the AAAR order regarding GST computation on refurbished car sales. The dispute concerned whether amounts paid to car owners and refurbishment costs should be included in purchase price for margin calculation under N/N. 08/2018-CT (Rate). Petitioner argued the appellate authority failed to address ITC issues not considered by AAR in the original valuation appeal. HC upheld the AAAR order but expunged certain observations, noting respondent could not dispute that ITC matters were not before the AAR. The challenge to AAR's order was not pressed by petitioner.
HC partly allowed the writ petition challenging the AAAR order regarding GST computation on refurbished car sales. The dispute concerned whether amounts paid to car owners and refurbishment costs should be included in purchase price for margin calculation under N/N. 08/2018-CT (Rate). Petitioner argued the appellate authority failed to address ITC issues not considered by AAR in the original valuation appeal. HC upheld the AAAR order but expunged certain observations, noting respondent could not dispute that ITC matters were not before the AAR. The challenge to AAR's order was not pressed by petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.