Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
461 to 480 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Input tax credit mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A, in relation to import and SEZ procurements, did not by itself establish excess availment where GSTR-2A for the relevant period did not capture such credits by design. The HC noted that the petitioner had disclosed the procurements in GSTR-3B and later in GSTR-9, and that import credit was supported by the Bill of Entry; the demand, interest and penalty on this ground were set aside. On the remaining issues, including corporate guarantee, cross-charges, promotion expenses, merchant export rate, export refund, reverse charge on import of services and medical-consultation credit, the adjudication was found unsustainable for failure to consider the governing provisions, circulars, notifications and submissions, so those findings were remanded for fresh decision.
Input tax credit mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A, in relation to import and SEZ procurements, did not by itself establish excess availment where GSTR-2A for the relevant period did not capture such credits by design. The HC noted that the petitioner had disclosed the procurements in GSTR-3B and later in GSTR-9, and that import credit was supported by the Bill of Entry; the demand, interest and penalty on this ground were set aside. On the remaining issues, including corporate guarantee, cross-charges, promotion expenses, merchant export rate, export refund, reverse charge on import of services and medical-consultation credit, the adjudication was found unsustainable for failure to consider the governing provisions, circulars, notifications and submissions, so those findings were remanded for fresh decision.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.