Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10041 to 10060 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.