Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
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...
Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that extended beyond its insertion, and the appeal was maintainable by the Union of India as an aggrieved person through an authorised officer. The Tribunal held that false answers in ODI filings could not be excused by later form changes, and that protective seizure under Section 37A was wrongly set aside on that basis. It also found the Competent Authority's acceptance of step-down subsidiary reporting compliance and bona fide use of ODI funds to be perverse for want of supporting material. Alleged denial of natural justice was rejected because the respondent had received summons, filed replies, and obtained further time. The impugned order was set aside and the seizure restored.
Section 37A could be invoked on a continuing contravention that extended beyond its insertion, and the appeal was maintainable by the Union of India as an aggrieved person through an authorised officer. The Tribunal held that false answers in ODI filings could not be excused by later form changes, and that protective seizure under Section 37A was wrongly set aside on that basis. It also found the Competent Authority's acceptance of step-down subsidiary reporting compliance and bona fide use of ODI funds to be perverse for want of supporting material. Alleged denial of natural justice was rejected because the respondent had received summons, filed replies, and obtained further time. The impugned order was set aside and the seizure restored.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.