Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
2701 to 2720 of 96100 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 allowed the petition, holding that the impugned declarations under Entry 9 and Entry 10 of the Notifications dated 28.06.2017 are ultra vires the Constitution and the IGST Act insofar as they seek to impose IGST on a service component already subsumed within a composite supply of goods taxed under IGST. Applying binding higher-court authority, the court concluded that duplicative taxation of the service element cannot stand; where legislation treats the composite supply as a tax on goods inclusive of ancillary services, no separate IGST may be levied on the service. Relief was granted to the Petitioner against the Revenue, quashing the notifications to the extent specified.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the impugned declarations under Entry 9 and Entry 10 of the Notifications dated 28.06.2017 are ultra vires the Constitution and the IGST Act insofar as they seek to impose IGST on a service component already subsumed within a composite supply of goods taxed under IGST. Applying binding higher-court authority, the court concluded that duplicative taxation of the service element cannot stand; where legislation treats the composite supply as a tax on goods inclusive of ancillary services, no separate IGST may be levied on the service. Relief was granted to the Petitioner against the Revenue, quashing the notifications to the extent specified.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.