Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
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.