Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders, holding the assessing authorities exceeded jurisdiction in initiating proceedings under Section 73. On review of original records the court found the petitioner to be a work-contractor awarded contracts by a state agency for the relevant assessment years, and that payments were effected after GST implementation; however, that temporal change did not confer jurisdiction on GST authorities to levy tax, interest or penalty for pre-GST transactions merely on a GSTR-3B/Form-26AS mismatch. The HC held the proper course was notification to the pre-GST assessing authority under the applicable indirect tax law, not initiation of Section 73 proceedings under the GST regime.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders, holding the assessing authorities exceeded jurisdiction in initiating proceedings under Section 73. On review of original records the court found the petitioner to be a work-contractor awarded contracts by a state agency for the relevant assessment years, and that payments were effected after GST implementation; however, that temporal change did not confer jurisdiction on GST authorities to levy tax, interest or penalty for pre-GST transactions merely on a GSTR-3B/Form-26AS mismatch. The HC held the proper course was notification to the pre-GST assessing authority under the applicable indirect tax law, not initiation of Section 73 proceedings under the GST regime.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
