Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Corporate guarantees issued by a company to secure loans for its subsidiaries were held not to constitute a taxable supply of service where no fee, commission, security or other consideration was received or payable. The Court treated the guarantees as in-house financial support, not a regular business of providing guarantees, and quashed the summons and show cause notice founded on GST demand. By contrast, the constitutional challenge to Rule 28(2) of the GST valuation rules failed because fiscal legislation and delegated tax measures are entitled to wide legislative deference, and no clear constitutional transgression was shown. The petition was therefore partly allowed.
Corporate guarantees issued by a company to secure loans for its subsidiaries were held not to constitute a taxable supply of service where no fee, commission, security or other consideration was received or payable. The Court treated the guarantees as in-house financial support, not a regular business of providing guarantees, and quashed the summons and show cause notice founded on GST demand. By contrast, the constitutional challenge to Rule 28(2) of the GST valuation rules failed because fiscal legislation and delegated tax measures are entitled to wide legislative deference, and no clear constitutional transgression was shown. The petition was therefore partly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.