Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1061 to 1080 of 96365 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
The HC held that a post-import obligation under an exemption notification may continue after rescission, and Section 159A can preserve action despite withdrawal or modification of the notification, but only within the statutory limitation period. Proceedings for confiscation, fine in lieu of confiscation, and penalty remained subject to Section 28 limitation. Because the show cause notice was issued beyond five years from the relevant date, the penal proceedings were time-barred and could not be sustained. The court distinguished the cited precedent on the ground that the notice there had been issued within time.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.