Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
The Tribunal accepted the DGAP report in an anti-profiteering matter concerning construction services and additional input tax credit on the footing that the benefit had already been passed on to home-buyers by commensurate price reduction. After redetermination, the report found excess benefit had been passed to eligible buyers, and the differential amounts with interest due to the two complainants had been paid and acknowledged. As no other home-buyer objected to the report, no surviving basis remained to hold profiteering against the respondent, and no contravention of section 171 was made out.
The Tribunal accepted the DGAP report in an anti-profiteering matter concerning construction services and additional input tax credit on the footing that the benefit had already been passed on to home-buyers by commensurate price reduction. After redetermination, the report found excess benefit had been passed to eligible buyers, and the differential amounts with interest due to the two complainants had been paid and acknowledged. As no other home-buyer objected to the report, no surviving basis remained to hold profiteering against the respondent, and no contravention of section 171 was made out.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
