Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Anti profiteering provisions are treated as consumer protective and the six month period in Rule 133 is directory, so proceedings are not time barred. Where a supplier increased base prices coincident with a GST rate reduction, the presumption that tax benefit was not passed applies and the supplier is required to disgorge the profiteered amount. Interest on the disgorged amount can be imposed only from the date the interest clause became effective (28.06.2019). Penalty under the provision that came into force later cannot be applied retrospectively. Half the recovered amount is directed to the central consumer welfare fund and half to the state fund.
Anti profiteering provisions are treated as consumer protective and the six month period in Rule 133 is directory, so proceedings are not time barred. Where a supplier increased base prices coincident with a GST rate reduction, the presumption that tax benefit was not passed applies and the supplier is required to disgorge the profiteered amount. Interest on the disgorged amount can be imposed only from the date the interest clause became effective (28.06.2019). Penalty under the provision that came into force later cannot be applied retrospectively. Half the recovered amount is directed to the central consumer welfare fund and half to the state fund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.