The court held that electricity tariff for determining market value must include all components, including duty. It ruled that excluding such elements artificially reduces eligible deduction.
The Court held that the controversy was identical to a previously decided case. The petition was accordingly disposed of without fresh examination of merits.
The Tribunal held that imports across multiple consignments without one-to-one correlation cannot be treated as complete drones. It set aside the denial of provisional release.
The court held that service tax paid on foreign exchange profit was not taxable and should have been refunded. It ruled that limitation cannot justify retention of wrongly collected tax.
Observations regarding inconsistencies and possible backdating of documents led the Court to closely examine the claim. The case reflects interplay between arbitration findings and insolvency proceedings.
The Court held that procedural delay in filing Form 10B should not result in denial of exemption. It emphasized that substantive benefits under Sections 11 and 12 must be granted where eligibility exists.
The case involved penalty for failure to respond to statutory notices during assessment. The Tribunal reduced the penalty after both parties agreed on a lower amount to resolve the dispute.
The issue involved denial of exemption for failure to attach audited accounts with Form 10B. The Tribunal held such lapse to be procedural and directed reconsideration, emphasizing that substantive compliance cannot be denied for technical defects.
The Tribunal held that absence of commenced activities is not a valid ground to deny registration where objects are charitable and proposed activities align with them.
The issue involved challenge to provisional attachment under Section 83 of the CGST Act. The Court refused to interfere, holding that the petitioner must first exhaust the statutory remedy of filing objections under Rule 159(5).
