Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
Section 80P deduction covers Souharda credit societies, including qualifying surplus-deposit interest, subject to member KYC verification for cash dep...
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.