Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of a rectification application concerning a mismatch in Form GSTR 3B due to a supplier's failure to file Form GSTR-01. The petitioner failed to respond to the show cause notice, leading to the issuance of the assessment order. The rectification application was rejected as no error apparent on the face of the record existed in the original order. The court held that factual disputes raised by the petitioner must be addressed during the assessment process, not through rectification proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and no interference was warranted. The petition was dismissed.
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of a rectification application concerning a mismatch in Form GSTR 3B due to a supplier's failure to file Form GSTR-01. The petitioner failed to respond to the show cause notice, leading to the issuance of the assessment order. The rectification application was rejected as no error apparent on the face of the record existed in the original order. The court held that factual disputes raised by the petitioner must be addressed during the assessment process, not through rectification proceedings. Consequently, the impugned order was affirmed, and no interference was warranted. The petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
