Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
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.