Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
In a challenge concerning GST proceedings for delayed return filing, the court noted that no late fee under s.47 had been imposed, and held that if the confirmed tax demand had already been recovered and paid, no further pre-deposit would be required for the de novo proceedings arising from the impugned order dated 24.08.2024, and the assessee must file a reply to Form GST DRC-01 with supporting documents treating the impugned orders as an addendum to the show cause notice. The challenge to the assessment order was dismissed, while the remaining impugned orders were remanded subject to deposit of 50% of the disputed tax. - HC
In a challenge concerning GST proceedings for delayed return filing, the court noted that no late fee under s.47 had been imposed, and held that if the confirmed tax demand had already been recovered and paid, no further pre-deposit would be required for the de novo proceedings arising from the impugned order dated 24.08.2024, and the assessee must file a reply to Form GST DRC-01 with supporting documents treating the impugned orders as an addendum to the show cause notice. The challenge to the assessment order was dismissed, while the remaining impugned orders were remanded subject to deposit of 50% of the disputed tax. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
