Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 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 dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable in view of alleged fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit and clandestine clearance of goods, holding that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily inappropriate where complex factual investigations, voluminous evidence and potential prejudice to the exchequer and the GST regime are involved. The Court relegated the Petitioner to statutory appellate remedies, observed that large-scale ITC claims or GST evasion should be ventilated on appeal, and permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order by 30 November 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
The HC dismissed the writ petition as not maintainable in view of alleged fraudulent availment of Input Tax Credit and clandestine clearance of goods, holding that writ jurisdiction is ordinarily inappropriate where complex factual investigations, voluminous evidence and potential prejudice to the exchequer and the GST regime are involved. The Court relegated the Petitioner to statutory appellate remedies, observed that large-scale ITC claims or GST evasion should be ventilated on appeal, and permitted the Petitioner to file an appeal against the impugned order by 30 November 2025 with the requisite pre-deposit in accordance with law. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
