Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
The HC allowed petitioner's writ petition challenging rejection of benefits under Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019. Respondents denied benefits solely because scheme deadline had expired, despite petitioner's COVID-related payment difficulties. The HC relied on Supreme Court limitation extension judgments and favorable High Court decisions from Madras, Bombay, Gujarat, and Delhi granting SVLDRS benefits in COVID circumstances, even for post-deadline payments. The court held that denying scheme benefits would contradict the scheme's objective of liquidating past central excise and service tax disputes before GST implementation and would cause injustice to an otherwise eligible declarant. Following Madras HC precedent in N. Sundarajan, the court determined scheme provisions were directive rather than mandatory. The impugned rejection order and demand notices were quashed, with directions issued to accept petitioner's payment and issue discharge certificate.
The HC allowed petitioner's writ petition challenging rejection of benefits under Sabka Vishwas Legacy Dispute Resolution Scheme 2019. Respondents denied benefits solely because scheme deadline had expired, despite petitioner's COVID-related payment difficulties. The HC relied on Supreme Court limitation extension judgments and favorable High Court decisions from Madras, Bombay, Gujarat, and Delhi granting SVLDRS benefits in COVID circumstances, even for post-deadline payments. The court held that denying scheme benefits would contradict the scheme's objective of liquidating past central excise and service tax disputes before GST implementation and would cause injustice to an otherwise eligible declarant. Following Madras HC precedent in N. Sundarajan, the court determined scheme provisions were directive rather than mandatory. The impugned rejection order and demand notices were quashed, with directions issued to accept petitioner's payment and issue discharge certificate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
