Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3481 to 3500 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AT held that the Respondent engaged in profiteering under Section 171, CGST Act, by failing to pass on GST rate reductions effective 01.10.2019; the statutory rebuttable presumption that reduced tax rates require commensurate price reductions was not successfully rebutted. The Respondent's claim of COVID-related additional costs was found unsubstantiated and after-the-fact. The AT directed recovery of Rs. 31,28,631 with interest at 18% p.a. from 01.10.2019 until realization, and ordered deposit of the realized amount into the Consumer Welfare Fund to be apportioned equally between the Centre and States.
The AT held that the Respondent engaged in profiteering under Section 171, CGST Act, by failing to pass on GST rate reductions effective 01.10.2019; the statutory rebuttable presumption that reduced tax rates require commensurate price reductions was not successfully rebutted. The Respondent's claim of COVID-related additional costs was found unsubstantiated and after-the-fact. The AT directed recovery of Rs. 31,28,631 with interest at 18% p.a. from 01.10.2019 until realization, and ordered deposit of the realized amount into the Consumer Welfare Fund to be apportioned equally between the Centre and States.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
