Business deductions and transfer pricing issues: tribunal treatment of software write-offs, donation receipts, warranty provisions, and related expens...
Equivalent value attachment under money laundering law upheld where received funds were treated as proceeds of crime and prior-acquired property could...
HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned show cause notice issued under s.74 of the CGST Act against the petitioner. The court held the jurisdictional fact of wilful suppression with intent to evade tax was not pleaded or established; mere omission to disclose correct value or apply the proper GST rate in GSTR-5A, or classification disputes concerning OIDAR-type services under Type-II/Type-III tests, do not satisfy the mens rea required to invoke the extended period. Absent proof of conscious, deliberate suppression to evade payment, the stringent provisions of s.74 cannot be lawfully invoked, rendering the SCN manifestly without jurisdiction and therefore liable to be quashed.
HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned show cause notice issued under s.74 of the CGST Act against the petitioner. The court held the jurisdictional fact of wilful suppression with intent to evade tax was not pleaded or established; mere omission to disclose correct value or apply the proper GST rate in GSTR-5A, or classification disputes concerning OIDAR-type services under Type-II/Type-III tests, do not satisfy the mens rea required to invoke the extended period. Absent proof of conscious, deliberate suppression to evade payment, the stringent provisions of s.74 cannot be lawfully invoked, rendering the SCN manifestly without jurisdiction and therefore liable to be quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
