Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
981 to 1000 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Challenge to a demand order for alleged fraudulent availment of ITC was rejected as the noticee failed to reply to the show cause notice despite being aware of the investigation, and personal hearing intimations sent to the registered email were held duly served, rendering the non-service plea false. Issuance of a consolidated show cause notice covering multiple financial years was held permissible, as analysis across "periods" can be necessary to establish a pattern of fraud. On adjudicatory jurisdiction, it was held that in multi-noticee matters jurisdiction lies with the commissionerate linked to the highest proposed demand, consistent with the relevant circular. Writ jurisdiction was declined given disputed facts and availability of statutory appeal; the petition was dismissed with exemplary costs. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.