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...
The HC set aside the unreasoned order rejecting the petitioner's fresh GST registration application, finding that the Proper Officer failed to record requisite findings under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act. The Court noted the petitioner had remedies available for revocation of cancellation and appeal but chose to file a fresh application, which is not barred by statute. The rejection order lacked reference to the statutory provisions and did not comply with the circular's requirements. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh consideration of the registration application in accordance with law. The petitioner's application was allowed by way of remand.
The HC set aside the unreasoned order rejecting the petitioner's fresh GST registration application, finding that the Proper Officer failed to record requisite findings under Section 29(2)(b) and (c) of the CGST Act. The Court noted the petitioner had remedies available for revocation of cancellation and appeal but chose to file a fresh application, which is not barred by statute. The rejection order lacked reference to the statutory provisions and did not comply with the circular's requirements. Consequently, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner for fresh consideration of the registration application in accordance with law. The petitioner's application was allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.