Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
The AT affirmed that, following review of the DGAP report and hearing, no reduction in GST rate nor accrual of benefit from Input Tax Credit arose in respect of the respondent's projects "Gurgaon Hills" and "Grand Hyatt Gurgaon Residences," and therefore no anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 attached. Consequently, the AT held that the statutory requirement to pass on benefit of rate reduction or ITC was not triggered and ordered disposal of the proceedings against the respondent. The AT directed supply of the order to the respondent and the concerned Commissioner CGST/SGST for administrative action.
The AT affirmed that, following review of the DGAP report and hearing, no reduction in GST rate nor accrual of benefit from Input Tax Credit arose in respect of the respondent's projects "Gurgaon Hills" and "Grand Hyatt Gurgaon Residences," and therefore no anti-profiteering liability under Section 171 of the CGST Act, 2017 attached. Consequently, the AT held that the statutory requirement to pass on benefit of rate reduction or ITC was not triggered and ordered disposal of the proceedings against the respondent. The AT directed supply of the order to the respondent and the concerned Commissioner CGST/SGST for administrative action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.