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 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 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
