Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
The HC quashed the impugned order directing the petitioner to pay alleged deficit stamp duty and penalty, finding the respondent's determination misconceived insofar as renting/leasing of a residential dwelling is exempt from GST under Entry No. 12 of Central Tax Notification No. 12/2017. The court held the petitioner's challenge meritorious, declared the impugned order dated 19.10.2020 void, and directed the respondent to refund Rs. 2,58,700 (comprising deficit stamp duty and penalty) to the petitioner within six weeks. Costs not expressly awarded. The petition is disposed of.
The HC quashed the impugned order directing the petitioner to pay alleged deficit stamp duty and penalty, finding the respondent's determination misconceived insofar as renting/leasing of a residential dwelling is exempt from GST under Entry No. 12 of Central Tax Notification No. 12/2017. The court held the petitioner's challenge meritorious, declared the impugned order dated 19.10.2020 void, and directed the respondent to refund Rs. 2,58,700 (comprising deficit stamp duty and penalty) to the petitioner within six weeks. Costs not expressly awarded. The petition is disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
