Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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...
Authorities under the GST regime cannot disregard a binding High Court declaration on SEZ refund claims merely because the issue has been taken to the Supreme Court; the law declared in Britannia continued to apply until displaced by a contrary High Court or Supreme Court ruling. On that basis, the refund rejection and appellate orders were unsustainable insofar as they refused to follow Britannia. The Court also noted that the question whether the services were for authorised operations, supported by the specified officer's endorsement, had not been adjudicated below and required fresh examination. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.
Authorities under the GST regime cannot disregard a binding High Court declaration on SEZ refund claims merely because the issue has been taken to the Supreme Court; the law declared in Britannia continued to apply until displaced by a contrary High Court or Supreme Court ruling. On that basis, the refund rejection and appellate orders were unsustainable insofar as they refused to follow Britannia. The Court also noted that the question whether the services were for authorised operations, supported by the specified officer's endorsement, had not been adjudicated below and required fresh examination. The matter was remanded to the Assistant Commissioner for reconsideration in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
