Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Additional input tax credit under GST had accrued to the respondent and was not passed on to homebuyers by commensurate price reduction, as the Tribunal accepted the DGAP's finding that the input tax credit-to-purchase value ratio increased post-GST and the respondent accepted the computation; this amounted to contravention of Section 171. The Tribunal further held that the obligation to pass on the benefit arose at the time of supply, so the profiteered amount had to be refunded with 18% interest from the date of collection of the last instalment until return to the eligible homebuyers. It also held that penalty was leviable under Section 171(3A), subject to the statutory proviso on deposit within thirty days.
Additional input tax credit under GST had accrued to the respondent and was not passed on to homebuyers by commensurate price reduction, as the Tribunal accepted the DGAP's finding that the input tax credit-to-purchase value ratio increased post-GST and the respondent accepted the computation; this amounted to contravention of Section 171. The Tribunal further held that the obligation to pass on the benefit arose at the time of supply, so the profiteered amount had to be refunded with 18% interest from the date of collection of the last instalment until return to the eligible homebuyers. It also held that penalty was leviable under Section 171(3A), subject to the statutory proviso on deposit within thirty days.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.