The article clarifies that ASISSE notices are issued by NSO under MoSPI only for statistical data collection and have no connection with tax scrutiny or GST investigations.
The Competition Commission of India held that allegations of excessive pricing for medicines, tests, and consumables were not conclusively established. The case was closed after the Commission found insufficient evidence of abuse of dominant position.
The article explains how travel gaps in insurance coverage can expose travellers to financial risks during medical emergencies, delays, or baggage loss. It highlights the importance of continuous travel insurance coverage throughout international trips.
The Madras High Court held that reassessment proceedings must be conducted only under the Faceless Assessment Scheme. The reassessment notice was quashed after the Court relied on an earlier Division Bench ruling.
The certificate clarifies that dealing and investment in securities are outside the scope of GST. Companies engaged solely in securities transactions are generally not liable for GST registration.
Learn how banks use stock and receivables audits to independently verify inventory and debtors before allowing working capital withdrawals. The article explains drawing power, audit procedures, and why accurate stock verification is critical for lenders.
Courts ruled that telecom towers remain movable goods because they can be dismantled and relocated, even when bolted to concrete foundations. The decision preserves GST input tax credit eligibility for telecom infrastructure.
The CCI observed that there was no evidence that medicines or consumables were sold above manufacturer-fixed MRPs. The Commission held that profit margins alone were insufficient to establish abuse of dominance.
The Tribunal ruled that once an assessee validly opts for the DCF method and submits a qualified valuation report, the Assessing Officer cannot switch to the NAV method. The decision reinforces the statutory valuation options available under Rule 11UA.
The Appellate Tribunal under SAFEMA held that routing demonetized cash through another person’s bank account constituted a benami transaction under the PBPT Act. The Tribunal ruled that cash qualifies as “property” and attachment could continue to the extent of the remaining benefit retained.
