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...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1481 to 1500 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
State GST authorities may initiate intelligence-based enforcement action under the GST regime even where the taxpayer is administratively assigned to the Central administration, so the challenge to jurisdiction failed. Disputes over classification and the assessing authority's finding of suppression for invoking Section 74 involved disputed facts and could not be examined in writ jurisdiction, so those objections had to be pursued before the statutory appellate authority under Section 107. The writ court was therefore correct in directing the taxpayer to avail the appeal remedy while leaving all grounds, including jurisdiction, open before the appellate forum.
State GST authorities may initiate intelligence-based enforcement action under the GST regime even where the taxpayer is administratively assigned to the Central administration, so the challenge to jurisdiction failed. Disputes over classification and the assessing authority's finding of suppression for invoking Section 74 involved disputed facts and could not be examined in writ jurisdiction, so those objections had to be pursued before the statutory appellate authority under Section 107. The writ court was therefore correct in directing the taxpayer to avail the appeal remedy while leaving all grounds, including jurisdiction, open before the appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.