International transaction characterisation of domestic divestment of support services business rejected; transaction between resident associated enter...
Minimum Import Price restrictions for Black Pepper, Areca-nuts and Apples upheld; procedural laying failure not fatal, notifications to be placed befo...
Transaction value between related persons requires market-equivalent pricing; importer must prove declared value mirrors ordinary international trade ...
Classification of exported insecticides under export tariff affirmed; reclassification and related penalties set aside and MEIS scrip jurisdiction rec...
A composite assessment order covering more than one financial year was challenged as violating Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. Applying binding precedent, it was held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly relate to more than one tax period-either more than one month where proceedings are initiated before the due date for filing the annual return, or more than one year where the due date has been reached. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the appellate order affirming it were set aside, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. - HC
A composite assessment order covering more than one financial year was challenged as violating Sections 73 and 74 of the GST Act, 2017. Applying binding precedent, it was held that a single show-cause notice or composite assessment order cannot validly relate to more than one tax period-either more than one month where proceedings are initiated before the due date for filing the annual return, or more than one year where the due date has been reached. Consequently, the impugned assessment order and the appellate order affirming it were set aside, with liberty to the department to initiate fresh proceedings separately for each assessment year. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
