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 on purchases made while the supplier was shown as registered on the GST portal was not finally decided on merits, because the High Court found a prima facie case for interference and required fresh, reasoned reconsideration. The impugned order denying credit was quashed, and the authority was directed to reconsider the claim in the light of the Division Bench rulings in Shyamal Mal Paul and Jyoti Tar Products, including the effect of later retrospective cancellation of the supplier's registration on invoices issued during the relevant period. Entitlement to the disputed credit was left open.
Input tax credit on purchases made while the supplier was shown as registered on the GST portal was not finally decided on merits, because the High Court found a prima facie case for interference and required fresh, reasoned reconsideration. The impugned order denying credit was quashed, and the authority was directed to reconsider the claim in the light of the Division Bench rulings in Shyamal Mal Paul and Jyoti Tar Products, including the effect of later retrospective cancellation of the supplier's registration on invoices issued during the relevant period. Entitlement to the disputed credit was left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.