Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The HC held that the service of the order under section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was proper, having been uploaded on the portal and communicated via email. Although the petitioner's explanation for preferring the appeal was not fully satisfactory, the court accepted the partial explanation and, considering the absence of a constituted appellate tribunal, directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount within three weeks, in addition to the amount already paid. Upon such deposit, the appellate authority was mandated to hear and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the HC set aside the appellate order dated 23 September 2024 and any consequential demand raised in Form GST APL-04, disposing of the petition accordingly.
The HC held that the service of the order under section 73 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 was proper, having been uploaded on the portal and communicated via email. Although the petitioner's explanation for preferring the appeal was not fully satisfactory, the court accepted the partial explanation and, considering the absence of a constituted appellate tribunal, directed the petitioner to deposit 10% of the disputed tax amount within three weeks, in addition to the amount already paid. Upon such deposit, the appellate authority was mandated to hear and decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law. Consequently, the HC set aside the appellate order dated 23 September 2024 and any consequential demand raised in Form GST APL-04, disposing of the petition accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
