Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
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...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC quashed the original and appellate orders under the CGST regime because a material factual claim regarding reversal and reclassification of input tax credit before the show cause notice had not been properly considered. The petitioner had raised the point earlier, but it was rejected for want of documentary support; however, the respondent later confirmed the correctness of that submission before the Court. On that limited basis, the Court held that the foundation of the impugned orders required reconsideration and remanded the matter to the adjudicatory authority for fresh decision expeditiously, leaving all merits open.
The HC quashed the original and appellate orders under the CGST regime because a material factual claim regarding reversal and reclassification of input tax credit before the show cause notice had not been properly considered. The petitioner had raised the point earlier, but it was rejected for want of documentary support; however, the respondent later confirmed the correctness of that submission before the Court. On that limited basis, the Court held that the foundation of the impugned orders required reconsideration and remanded the matter to the adjudicatory authority for fresh decision expeditiously, leaving all merits open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.