Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned assessment order violated Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice by failing to serve a prior show-cause notice; the Court adhered to its consistent jurisprudence that non-issuance of the requisite notice vitiates the assessment process. The HC set aside Order-in-Original No.70/2024-25-GST dated 25.02.2025 and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for completion of assessment in accordance with law after issuance of the necessary notice. The period from the date of the impugned order until receipt of the HC order is excluded for limitation. Petition allowed by remand.
The HC allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned assessment order violated Rule 142(1A) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and principles of natural justice by failing to serve a prior show-cause notice; the Court adhered to its consistent jurisprudence that non-issuance of the requisite notice vitiates the assessment process. The HC set aside Order-in-Original No.70/2024-25-GST dated 25.02.2025 and remanded the matter to the assessing authority for completion of assessment in accordance with law after issuance of the necessary notice. The period from the date of the impugned order until receipt of the HC order is excluded for limitation. Petition allowed by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.