Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The HC dismissed the petition seeking modification of the order adjudicating a composite SCN against the Petitioners and challenging the vires of N/N. 06/2020-Central Tax. The Court held that under Section 2(4) of the CGST Act, the Adjudicating Authority excludes the Appellate Authority, which has full power to consider the matter afresh on appeal under Section 107. The adjudication order was detailed and considered the Petitioners' submissions, including those related to multiple financial years. The legislative intent prohibits remanding the matter back to ensure finality, but the Appellate Authority may confirm, modify, or annul the order on merits. Reliance on precedents affirmed the wide scope of appellate powers under Section 107(11). Consequently, the Court declined to interfere and dismissed the application for modification.
The HC dismissed the petition seeking modification of the order adjudicating a composite SCN against the Petitioners and challenging the vires of N/N. 06/2020-Central Tax. The Court held that under Section 2(4) of the CGST Act, the Adjudicating Authority excludes the Appellate Authority, which has full power to consider the matter afresh on appeal under Section 107. The adjudication order was detailed and considered the Petitioners' submissions, including those related to multiple financial years. The legislative intent prohibits remanding the matter back to ensure finality, but the Appellate Authority may confirm, modify, or annul the order on merits. Reliance on precedents affirmed the wide scope of appellate powers under Section 107(11). Consequently, the Court declined to interfere and dismissed the application for modification.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.