Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Pending constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the Court held that recovery of outstanding GST dues was governed by the existing CBIC circular and the statutory pre-deposit mechanism under section 112 of the CGST Act. It disposed of the writ petitions without examining the merits of the input tax credit dispute, and granted the petitioner liberty to secure continued stay of recovery by filing the prescribed undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer and making the required pre-deposit within the time allowed. If that deposit was not made, the protection under the order would lapse and recovery of the balance demand could proceed.
Pending constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal, the Court held that recovery of outstanding GST dues was governed by the existing CBIC circular and the statutory pre-deposit mechanism under section 112 of the CGST Act. It disposed of the writ petitions without examining the merits of the input tax credit dispute, and granted the petitioner liberty to secure continued stay of recovery by filing the prescribed undertaking before the jurisdictional proper officer and making the required pre-deposit within the time allowed. If that deposit was not made, the protection under the order would lapse and recovery of the balance demand could proceed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.