Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that retrospective cancellation of petitioner's GST registration was unsustainable as the SCN did not propose cancellation with retrospective effect and lacked reasons justifying such retroactivity. Relying on settled law requiring clear notice and cogent reasons for retrospective cancellation, the Court found the cancellation order dated 17.08.2023 legally untenable. Consequently, the impugned appellate order dated 11.03.2025, which had dismissed petitioner's appeal as time-barred, was also set aside. The petitioner's GST registration was directed to be restored, and the writ petition was disposed of in these terms.
HC held that retrospective cancellation of petitioner's GST registration was unsustainable as the SCN did not propose cancellation with retrospective effect and lacked reasons justifying such retroactivity. Relying on settled law requiring clear notice and cogent reasons for retrospective cancellation, the Court found the cancellation order dated 17.08.2023 legally untenable. Consequently, the impugned appellate order dated 11.03.2025, which had dismissed petitioner's appeal as time-barred, was also set aside. The petitioner's GST registration was directed to be restored, and the writ petition was disposed of in these terms.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.