Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Post-sale discounts and non-monetary benefits in a principal-to-principal supply dispute could not be examined on merits because the factual basis before the appellate authority had materially changed. The original advance ruling had proceeded on the supplier-franchise relationship and the absence of any prior agreement on such benefits, while the appeal introduced a different case based on principal-to-principal transactions and prior scheme documents. As the altered facts were divergent from those placed before the original authority, the AAAR held that the correctness of the earlier ruling could not be determined on that record and remanded the matter to the AAR for fresh consideration in accordance with natural justice.
Post-sale discounts and non-monetary benefits in a principal-to-principal supply dispute could not be examined on merits because the factual basis before the appellate authority had materially changed. The original advance ruling had proceeded on the supplier-franchise relationship and the absence of any prior agreement on such benefits, while the appeal introduced a different case based on principal-to-principal transactions and prior scheme documents. As the altered facts were divergent from those placed before the original authority, the AAAR held that the correctness of the earlier ruling could not be determined on that record and remanded the matter to the AAR for fresh consideration in accordance with natural justice.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.