Revisionary jurisdiction under section 263 upheld; faceless assessments subject to revision when AO fails requisite enquiries, remitted for fresh asse...
Limited scope of processing under section 143(1): enhancement without show cause is unsustainable; remand for residency, taxation and TDS verification...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
