Statutory transfer formalities invalidated alleged share and property transfers, while retrospective record manipulation constituted oppression and mi...
Provisional attachment of laundered funds and equivalent-value property sustained, with statutory protection limited to pension, gratuity and providen...
Insolvency moratorium does not shield company officers from cheque dishonour prosecution for liability arising before corporate insolvency proceedings...
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.