Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AAR held that the Applicant is not a "Promoter" and therefore does not fall within Notification No. 7/2019-CT(Rate); the goods received (M-sand, P-sand, blue metal, boulders, hollow bricks) from unregistered suppliers are neither notified under section 9(3) nor does the Applicant's activity fall within the scope of section 9(4). Consequently, the Applicant is not liable to discharge tax under the reverse charge mechanism on purchases of those goods from unregistered persons.
AAR held that the Applicant is not a "Promoter" and therefore does not fall within Notification No. 7/2019-CT(Rate); the goods received (M-sand, P-sand, blue metal, boulders, hollow bricks) from unregistered suppliers are neither notified under section 9(3) nor does the Applicant's activity fall within the scope of section 9(4). Consequently, the Applicant is not liable to discharge tax under the reverse charge mechanism on purchases of those goods from unregistered persons.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.