Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The HC held that the impugned IGST levy on ocean freight under the reverse-charge notifications was ultra vires and contrary to the GST scheme, requiring refund of Rs. 2,62,37,558 paid by the Petitioner; the Respondents have refunded that amount. The petition further succeeded in claiming interest of Rs. 71,31,225, which the HC directed the Respondents to pay forthwith and in any event within four weeks of judgment. The court clarified that Sections 54/56 were inapplicable to the initial unlawful collection, but nonetheless sanctioned the quantified interest on the merits. Petition disposed.
The HC held that the impugned IGST levy on ocean freight under the reverse-charge notifications was ultra vires and contrary to the GST scheme, requiring refund of Rs. 2,62,37,558 paid by the Petitioner; the Respondents have refunded that amount. The petition further succeeded in claiming interest of Rs. 71,31,225, which the HC directed the Respondents to pay forthwith and in any event within four weeks of judgment. The court clarified that Sections 54/56 were inapplicable to the initial unlawful collection, but nonetheless sanctioned the quantified interest on the merits. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.