Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Input tax credit cannot be denied to a bona fide purchasing dealer who transacted with a registered supplier and complied with statutory requirements merely because the supplier failed to deposit the tax collected from the purchaser. The proper remedy is to proceed against the defaulting supplier, not to shift the burden onto the purchaser by way of vicarious liability. The demand and appellate orders were set aside because the controversy was covered by binding precedent, but the Department retained liberty to act in accordance with law if material shows the transactions were collusive or not bona fide.
Input tax credit cannot be denied to a bona fide purchasing dealer who transacted with a registered supplier and complied with statutory requirements merely because the supplier failed to deposit the tax collected from the purchaser. The proper remedy is to proceed against the defaulting supplier, not to shift the burden onto the purchaser by way of vicarious liability. The demand and appellate orders were set aside because the controversy was covered by binding precedent, but the Department retained liberty to act in accordance with law if material shows the transactions were collusive or not bona fide.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.