Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
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.