ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
