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...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Non-incorporation of the Document Identification Number required by the Board circulars rendered the appellate order invalid, as earlier decisions had treated DIN compliance as mandatory and failure to include it as fatal to the order's validity. The contention that the requirement applied only to communications and not to adjudicatory or appellate orders was rejected, because later precedent had extended the same consequence to such orders. A subsequent circular relaxing the requirement for email-communicated orders did not assist the respondent, since it came into force after the impugned order and, in any event, the alternative Unique Issue Number was also not used. The appellate order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner.
Non-incorporation of the Document Identification Number required by the Board circulars rendered the appellate order invalid, as earlier decisions had treated DIN compliance as mandatory and failure to include it as fatal to the order's validity. The contention that the requirement applied only to communications and not to adjudicatory or appellate orders was rejected, because later precedent had extended the same consequence to such orders. A subsequent circular relaxing the requirement for email-communicated orders did not assist the respondent, since it came into force after the impugned order and, in any event, the alternative Unique Issue Number was also not used. The appellate order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
