CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
Courier transshipment of imported goods via named carrier to air cargo stations renewed until 30.01.2026; exemption conditional, strict controls apply...
In real estate anti-profiteering analysis, the governing approach is to test project-level GST savings by comparing credit availed to purchase value in the pre-GST and post-GST periods. Applying that method, the Tribunal accepted the DGAP's use of purchase-value ratios, excluded reversed credit and units outside the relevant pre-occupancy sale pool, and held that no additional benefit had accrued to the developer. It also accepted that ledger adjustments could evidence passing on of input tax credit, and that the EPC contractor was not the supplier to homebuyers. The objections to methodology, verification, and alleged inconsistency were rejected, and no contravention of Section 171 was found.
In real estate anti-profiteering analysis, the governing approach is to test project-level GST savings by comparing credit availed to purchase value in the pre-GST and post-GST periods. Applying that method, the Tribunal accepted the DGAP's use of purchase-value ratios, excluded reversed credit and units outside the relevant pre-occupancy sale pool, and held that no additional benefit had accrued to the developer. It also accepted that ledger adjustments could evidence passing on of input tax credit, and that the EPC contractor was not the supplier to homebuyers. The objections to methodology, verification, and alleged inconsistency were rejected, and no contravention of Section 171 was found.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
