Transfer-pricing benchmarking and capital-receipt principles sustained taxpayer relief, while unsupported property-advance write-offs remained disallo...
Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
The HC remitted the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration whether the petitioner, who has paid the tax and limited its dispute to imposition of penalty and applicability of machinery provisions, validly contends that proceedings under s. 74 are inappropriate and should have been initiated under s. 73; the respondent is directed to exercise powers under s. 75(2) and complete the re-examination within three months from receipt of this order. The petitioner must file a detailed reply to the notice and treat the impugned order as a show cause notice within 30 days. The petition is disposed of.
The HC remitted the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration whether the petitioner, who has paid the tax and limited its dispute to imposition of penalty and applicability of machinery provisions, validly contends that proceedings under s. 74 are inappropriate and should have been initiated under s. 73; the respondent is directed to exercise powers under s. 75(2) and complete the re-examination within three months from receipt of this order. The petitioner must file a detailed reply to the notice and treat the impugned order as a show cause notice within 30 days. The petition is disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.