Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns may be dropped where the registered person furnishes all pending returns and pays the tax dues, interest and late fee, as reflected in the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules. The text notes that the cancellation power under Section 29(2)(c) extends to non-filing for six continuous months, but serious civil consequences justify permitting restoration on compliance. It also states that expiry of the revocation timeline was not treated as a bar in the circumstances discussed. The petitioner was given two months to approach the authority, which was directed to consider restoration expeditiously in accordance with law.
Cancellation of GST registration for non-filing of returns may be dropped where the registered person furnishes all pending returns and pays the tax dues, interest and late fee, as reflected in the proviso to Rule 22(4) of the CGST Rules. The text notes that the cancellation power under Section 29(2)(c) extends to non-filing for six continuous months, but serious civil consequences justify permitting restoration on compliance. It also states that expiry of the revocation timeline was not treated as a bar in the circumstances discussed. The petitioner was given two months to approach the authority, which was directed to consider restoration expeditiously in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.