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...
HC disposed of writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation under Section 29(2)(c) for non-furnishing returns for six months. Court found violation of natural justice principles as no personal hearing date was notified to petitioner. HC directed petitioner to approach concerned authority within two months seeking restoration by filing pending returns and paying tax dues with interest and late fees. Court held that if petitioner complies with proviso to Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules 2017, authority must consider restoration application expeditiously in accordance with law, given serious civil consequences of registration cancellation.
HC disposed of writ petition challenging GST registration cancellation under Section 29(2)(c) for non-furnishing returns for six months. Court found violation of natural justice principles as no personal hearing date was notified to petitioner. HC directed petitioner to approach concerned authority within two months seeking restoration by filing pending returns and paying tax dues with interest and late fees. Court held that if petitioner complies with proviso to Rule 22(4) of CGST Rules 2017, authority must consider restoration application expeditiously in accordance with law, given serious civil consequences of registration cancellation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
