Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
741 to 760 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAR addressed entitlement to input tax credit on GST paid for a contractor-built breakwater and concluded ITC is disallowed because the supply was a works contract for construction of immovable property and does not meet the statutory exception for plant and machinery. The authority applied the statutory definition of plant and machinery rather than functionality tests from other statutes, found the works contract fell under the immovable-property exclusion, and held the applicant ineligible for ITC. The AAR declined to rule on supplier-centric rate-notification applicability because the ruling would bind the applicant but not the contractor.
The AAR addressed entitlement to input tax credit on GST paid for a contractor-built breakwater and concluded ITC is disallowed because the supply was a works contract for construction of immovable property and does not meet the statutory exception for plant and machinery. The authority applied the statutory definition of plant and machinery rather than functionality tests from other statutes, found the works contract fell under the immovable-property exclusion, and held the applicant ineligible for ITC. The AAR declined to rule on supplier-centric rate-notification applicability because the ruling would bind the applicant but not the contractor.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
