Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Challenge to blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A was rejected where inspection and recorded statements indicated availment of credit on disputed invoices; the impugned blocking was held to fall within the regulatory scheme and not amenable to interference. A jurisdictional objection that a subordinate officer effected the block was dismissed because blocking was shown to be authorised by senior officers. The court nevertheless granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation and directed that the concerned officer hear the petitioner and decide the merits expeditiously, preferably within thirty days.
Challenge to blocking of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A was rejected where inspection and recorded statements indicated availment of credit on disputed invoices; the impugned blocking was held to fall within the regulatory scheme and not amenable to interference. A jurisdictional objection that a subordinate officer effected the block was dismissed because blocking was shown to be authorised by senior officers. The court nevertheless granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation and directed that the concerned officer hear the petitioner and decide the merits expeditiously, preferably within thirty days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.