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...
HC held that appellant was eligible for benefits under Karasamadhana Scheme, 2021, despite subsequent initiation of suo-motu revision proceedings under Section 64(1) of KVAT Act. Court ruled that Clause 5.7 of the scheme only disqualifies dealers against whom revision proceedings were already initiated before the scheme's notification date. Since no suo-motu revision was pending when the scheme was introduced, and appellant's application was accepted with order passed in their favor, subsequent initiation of revisional proceedings would defeat the scheme's purpose and object. Permitting post-acceptance revision would render the scheme arbitrary and unreasonable. Appeal allowed in favor of assessee-appellant.
HC held that appellant was eligible for benefits under Karasamadhana Scheme, 2021, despite subsequent initiation of suo-motu revision proceedings under Section 64(1) of KVAT Act. Court ruled that Clause 5.7 of the scheme only disqualifies dealers against whom revision proceedings were already initiated before the scheme's notification date. Since no suo-motu revision was pending when the scheme was introduced, and appellant's application was accepted with order passed in their favor, subsequent initiation of revisional proceedings would defeat the scheme's purpose and object. Permitting post-acceptance revision would render the scheme arbitrary and unreasonable. Appeal allowed in favor of assessee-appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
