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 AAR declined to admit the applicant's advance ruling application, holding the questions submitted fall outside the scope of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act and thus are not amenable to an advance ruling. The Authority found the dispute concerned an internal accounting error and proposed inter-party adjustment between the applicant and its supplier, which could have been rectified via annual returns; it is not an issue of admissibility of input tax credit under clause (d) of Section 97(2). Further, under Section 95(a) the AAR has no power to issue directives binding on a third-party supplier. Accordingly, the application is not admitted.
The AAR declined to admit the applicant's advance ruling application, holding the questions submitted fall outside the scope of Section 97(2) of the CGST Act and thus are not amenable to an advance ruling. The Authority found the dispute concerned an internal accounting error and proposed inter-party adjustment between the applicant and its supplier, which could have been rectified via annual returns; it is not an issue of admissibility of input tax credit under clause (d) of Section 97(2). Further, under Section 95(a) the AAR has no power to issue directives binding on a third-party supplier. Accordingly, the application is not admitted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.