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...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
A waiver application under Notification No. 21/2024-Central Tax was treated by the High Court as subject to a directory, not mandatory, three-month filing period because the notification used the word may. The rejection of the application solely on the ground of delay was therefore based on an erroneous interpretation of law. The Court quashed the rejection in FORM GST SPL-07 and directed the authority to reconsider the waiver application on merits in accordance with law, while keeping the show cause notice, summary notice and order in original in abeyance until that reconsideration.
A waiver application under Notification No. 21/2024-Central Tax was treated by the High Court as subject to a directory, not mandatory, three-month filing period because the notification used the word may. The rejection of the application solely on the ground of delay was therefore based on an erroneous interpretation of law. The Court quashed the rejection in FORM GST SPL-07 and directed the authority to reconsider the waiver application on merits in accordance with law, while keeping the show cause notice, summary notice and order in original in abeyance until that reconsideration.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
