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...
Absence of a Document Identification Number in GST assessment orders was treated as an inherent defect that invalidated the orders, following prior High Court rulings. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing. On the delay objection, the Court noted the controversy over service through the GST portal and the practical difficulties in accessing portal-served orders, and held that a delayed writ could still be entertained where the orders disclosed a patent irregularity. Relief was granted subject to deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with issues on merits left open.
Absence of a Document Identification Number in GST assessment orders was treated as an inherent defect that invalidated the orders, following prior High Court rulings. The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after giving the taxpayer an opportunity of hearing. On the delay objection, the Court noted the controversy over service through the GST portal and the practical difficulties in accessing portal-served orders, and held that a delayed writ could still be entertained where the orders disclosed a patent irregularity. Relief was granted subject to deposit of 20% of the disputed tax, with issues on merits left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.