Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Clinical trial and related R&D services supplied to a foreign recipient raised the issue whether the place of supply was outside India, making the supply an export and not liable to GST, and whether Notification No. 04/2019-IGST dated 30.09.2019 applied retrospectively to the period April 2018-March 2019. The notification clarified that for such services the place of supply is the location of the recipient, subject to conditions; since the recipient was located in the USA, the supply fell in a non-taxable territory. Treating the notification as beneficial, clarificatory and elucidatory, it was held to operate retrospectively, and the contrary view of the authorities was erroneous; the impugned orders were set aside and the petition was allowed - HC
Clinical trial and related R&D services supplied to a foreign recipient raised the issue whether the place of supply was outside India, making the supply an export and not liable to GST, and whether Notification No. 04/2019-IGST dated 30.09.2019 applied retrospectively to the period April 2018-March 2019. The notification clarified that for such services the place of supply is the location of the recipient, subject to conditions; since the recipient was located in the USA, the supply fell in a non-taxable territory. Treating the notification as beneficial, clarificatory and elucidatory, it was held to operate retrospectively, and the contrary view of the authorities was erroneous; the impugned orders were set aside and the petition was allowed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.