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...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Page of 4801
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1161 to 1180 of 96001 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Whether the 01.02.2019 amendment curtailing the time for refund applications could retrospectively extinguish accrued entitlement to refund of accumulated ITC under an inverted duty structure was determined by applying the presumption against retrospectivity to substantive curtailment of vested rights; absent express retrospective operation, the unamended "relevant date" continued to govern periods prior to the amendment, and the refund claims were not time-barred, including for July 2017-December 2018 (also within extended time under a notification) and January-March 2019 under Section 54. The rejection for January-March 2019 for alleged non-receipt of eligible inputs was found unreasoned. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh determination. - HC
Whether the 01.02.2019 amendment curtailing the time for refund applications could retrospectively extinguish accrued entitlement to refund of accumulated ITC under an inverted duty structure was determined by applying the presumption against retrospectivity to substantive curtailment of vested rights; absent express retrospective operation, the unamended "relevant date" continued to govern periods prior to the amendment, and the refund claims were not time-barred, including for July 2017-December 2018 (also within extended time under a notification) and January-March 2019 under Section 54. The rejection for January-March 2019 for alleged non-receipt of eligible inputs was found unreasoned. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh determination. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
