Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
The State policy for Special Economic Zones in Maharashtra made a clear promise of exemption from all State and local taxes, including octroi, and contemplated reimbursement where direct exemption was not feasible. The Court applied promissory estoppel and held that, absent any overriding public interest, the promise had to be honoured because it aligned with the SEZ Act and Rules and the policy objective of encouraging SEZ development. It accepted that the petitioner was entitled to refund of octroi paid with interest, subject to verification, and fastened liability on the State Government. Refund could not be ordered against the Municipal Corporation without the necessary statutory amendment, and relief for amendment of the octroi rules was declined because those rules had ceased to operate.
The State policy for Special Economic Zones in Maharashtra made a clear promise of exemption from all State and local taxes, including octroi, and contemplated reimbursement where direct exemption was not feasible. The Court applied promissory estoppel and held that, absent any overriding public interest, the promise had to be honoured because it aligned with the SEZ Act and Rules and the policy objective of encouraging SEZ development. It accepted that the petitioner was entitled to refund of octroi paid with interest, subject to verification, and fastened liability on the State Government. Refund could not be ordered against the Municipal Corporation without the necessary statutory amendment, and relief for amendment of the octroi rules was declined because those rules had ceased to operate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
