Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
GST proceedings on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting minerals were not finally adjudicated on merits because the levy issue is pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court found the facts to be almost identical to an earlier case and disposed of the writ petitions on the same terms, directing that the impugned proceedings remain in abeyance and that the respondent proceed in accordance with law after the Supreme Court decision. The Court therefore declined to examine the substantive GST demand at this stage and applied the earlier identical order.
GST proceedings on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting minerals were not finally adjudicated on merits because the levy issue is pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court found the facts to be almost identical to an earlier case and disposed of the writ petitions on the same terms, directing that the impugned proceedings remain in abeyance and that the respondent proceed in accordance with law after the Supreme Court decision. The Court therefore declined to examine the substantive GST demand at this stage and applied the earlier identical order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
