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...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
501 to 520 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC dismissed petitioner's challenge to order under Section 73 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner contended proper officer predetermined outcome by serving Form GST DRC-01A notice before show cause notice, violating natural justice. Court found no irregularity as petitioner received adequate opportunity to respond to show cause before personal hearing was scheduled. Despite petitioner's claim of unawareness due to accountant change, Court noted petitioner continued portal operations and filing returns throughout proceedings. Section 75(4) permits hearing opportunity when adverse decision is contemplated. Petitioner failed to appear for scheduled hearing, thus cannot question the process. No predetermination or natural justice violation established. Petition disposed of without interference to impugned order.
HC dismissed petitioner's challenge to order under Section 73 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. Petitioner contended proper officer predetermined outcome by serving Form GST DRC-01A notice before show cause notice, violating natural justice. Court found no irregularity as petitioner received adequate opportunity to respond to show cause before personal hearing was scheduled. Despite petitioner's claim of unawareness due to accountant change, Court noted petitioner continued portal operations and filing returns throughout proceedings. Section 75(4) permits hearing opportunity when adverse decision is contemplated. Petitioner failed to appear for scheduled hearing, thus cannot question the process. No predetermination or natural justice violation established. Petition disposed of without interference to impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.