Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC disposed the petition and directed the Respondent to expeditiously adjudicate the Petitioner's IGST refund applications. The court held that refunds must be processed strictly in accordance with the statutory scheme and timelines; where the Department failed to issue a deficiency memo within the prescribed period, the Petitioner is entitled to interest for the resultant delay. Simultaneously, the court noted the Petitioner's own inordinate delay in responding to the deficiency memo and required the Respondent to account for that delay when quantifying interest. The HC ordered prompt final decision on the refund claims consistent with the Act and Rules.
The HC disposed the petition and directed the Respondent to expeditiously adjudicate the Petitioner's IGST refund applications. The court held that refunds must be processed strictly in accordance with the statutory scheme and timelines; where the Department failed to issue a deficiency memo within the prescribed period, the Petitioner is entitled to interest for the resultant delay. Simultaneously, the court noted the Petitioner's own inordinate delay in responding to the deficiency memo and required the Respondent to account for that delay when quantifying interest. The HC ordered prompt final decision on the refund claims consistent with the Act and Rules.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.