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 upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six continuous months. However, relying on the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Court held that if the petitioner submits all pending returns and pays the outstanding tax along with interest and late fees, the empowered officer has jurisdiction to drop cancellation proceedings and restore registration by issuing Form GST REG-20. The writ petition was disposed of with a directive that the petitioner may approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration upon compliance with the prescribed formalities.
The HC upheld the cancellation of the petitioner's GST registration under Section 29(2)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, due to non-filing of returns for six continuous months. However, relying on the proviso to sub-rule (4) of Rule 22 of the CGST Rules, 2017, the Court held that if the petitioner submits all pending returns and pays the outstanding tax along with interest and late fees, the empowered officer has jurisdiction to drop cancellation proceedings and restore registration by issuing Form GST REG-20. The writ petition was disposed of with a directive that the petitioner may approach the competent authority within two months to seek restoration of GST registration upon compliance with the prescribed formalities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.