Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
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 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.