High Court ruled that software consultancy services provided to a foreign parent on a principal-to-principal basis qualify as export of services. Refund rejection treating them as intermediary services was set aside.
The High Court held that reassessment notices issued after excluding periods mandated by Supreme Court rulings were time-barred, rendering subsequent proceedings invalid
The High Court recalled its earlier order after finding that key facts about undeclared phones and gold were concealed. The ruling holds that writ relief cannot survive when the court is misled.
The case involved delay in export clearance and refunds due to contradictory CRCL reports. The Court directed Customs to decide representations and clarify the issue within fixed timelines.
The Court set aside rejection of a waiver application after the taxpayer deposited IGST under RCM in cash, holding that statutory conditions were ultimately satisfied.
The court held that GST demands for periods prior to insolvency resolution could not be raised after approval of the resolution plan, as such claims stood extinguished under insolvency law.
The dispute arose from GST registration cancellation under Section 29(2)(b). The ruling allowed restoration once statutory dues were paid and returns permitted to be filed.
The dispute concerned whether the limitation period under Section 153C should be counted from the search date or from the date seized documents were handed over. The Court held that the handover date governs, excluding earlier assessment years from reassessment.
The court closed the writ after the State clarified that recovery proceedings were initiated only against the assessee husband. The petitioner was granted liberty to re-approach the court if her property is targeted.
The issue was whether interest earned from a co-operative bank qualifies for deduction under Section 80P(2)(d). The Tribunal held that such interest is deductible, as a co-operative bank is itself a co-operative society.
