Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC held that the assignment of leasehold rights by the petitioner constitutes a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and does not amount to a supply of service under Section 7(1)(a) of the Act. Consequently, such transactions fall outside the scope of GST levy under Section 9, as clarified by Clauses 5(b) of Schedule 2 and 5 of Schedule 3 of the Act. The impugned order passed under Section 74 was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed, confirming that GST is not applicable on the assignment of leasehold rights in this context.
The HC held that the assignment of leasehold rights by the petitioner constitutes a transfer of benefits arising from immovable property and does not amount to a supply of service under Section 7(1)(a) of the Act. Consequently, such transactions fall outside the scope of GST levy under Section 9, as clarified by Clauses 5(b) of Schedule 2 and 5 of Schedule 3 of the Act. The impugned order passed under Section 74 was quashed and set aside, and the petition was allowed, confirming that GST is not applicable on the assignment of leasehold rights in this context.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
