Madras High Court held that recovery action against the Directors of the company under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and Revenue Recovery Act not justified since company is non-existent.
The petitioner is engaged in the business of construction and development works. The petitioner performed various contracts under the respondent No. 2. In respect to those works, though the petitioner had received the contractual amount after deduction of tax.
Gujarat High Court held that recovery on the basis of such summary of the order, in absence of any detailed order, passed under any of the provisions of the GST Act is liable to be quashed and set aside.
Madras High Court held that since the petitioner has already deposited 75% of the disputed tax, petitioner may be grated one final opportunity of explaining the discrepancies between Form GSTR-01 and GSTR-3B.
EPFO directs employers to activate UAN for employees via Aadhaar OTP to ensure access to benefits under government schemes by November 30, 2024.
The Supreme Court upholds CENVAT credit for telecom infrastructure, ruling in favor of telecom operators on towers and shelters.
Allahabad HC rules out penalty under Section 129 for technical error in e-way bill, highlighting no intent to evade tax.
Punjab & Haryana High Court sets aside denial of Input Tax Credit for demo vehicles, aligning with clarifications under Circular No. 231/25/2024-GST.
Punjab & Haryana High Court denies GST rectification after deadline in Bar Code India Ltd. case, stressing adherence to statutory timelines.
Understand related party transactions, their regulatory framework under the Companies Act and SEBI LODR, and their role in corporate governance and compliance.
