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 ...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 96046 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC, exercising extraordinary writ jurisdiction, set aside the impugned order refusing rectification under s.161 of the GST Act and ordered correction of a clerical/arithmetic error in the electronically filed figures whereby "Rs. 1,07,916.48" was erroneously recorded as "Rs. 1,07,91,648.00." The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), CT & GST Circle, for consideration of the petition for rectification and for modification of the assessment order under s.73 accordingly. The authority is directed to permit the petitioner to rectify the mistake and give consequential effect to the correction within four weeks of receipt of this order. Petition disposed.
The HC, exercising extraordinary writ jurisdiction, set aside the impugned order refusing rectification under s.161 of the GST Act and ordered correction of a clerical/arithmetic error in the electronically filed figures whereby "Rs. 1,07,916.48" was erroneously recorded as "Rs. 1,07,91,648.00." The matter is remitted to the Assistant Commissioner (State Tax), CT & GST Circle, for consideration of the petition for rectification and for modification of the assessment order under s.73 accordingly. The authority is directed to permit the petitioner to rectify the mistake and give consequential effect to the correction within four weeks of receipt of this order. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
