Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Payment of damages under an arbitral award did not amount to a taxable supply under the CGST Act because the settlement before the Delhi High Court was not an independent commercial arrangement to refrain from an act or tolerate a situation. The withdrawal or suspension of enforcement proceedings in the UK and US followed only from full satisfaction of the award and did not create separate consideration or a distinct service. In the absence of an independent contract and consideration, Section 7 and Entry 5(e) of Schedule II were inapplicable, and the IGST charge could not be sustained. The intimation and show cause notice were quashed for lack of jurisdiction, and the writ petition was entertained despite the alternate remedy rule.
Payment of damages under an arbitral award did not amount to a taxable supply under the CGST Act because the settlement before the Delhi High Court was not an independent commercial arrangement to refrain from an act or tolerate a situation. The withdrawal or suspension of enforcement proceedings in the UK and US followed only from full satisfaction of the award and did not create separate consideration or a distinct service. In the absence of an independent contract and consideration, Section 7 and Entry 5(e) of Schedule II were inapplicable, and the IGST charge could not be sustained. The intimation and show cause notice were quashed for lack of jurisdiction, and the writ petition was entertained despite the alternate remedy rule.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
