Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
101 to 120 of 95872 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Wrongful availment of input tax credit, where credit exceeded GSTR-2A and was utilised in GSTR-3B, was treated as prima facie suppression of facts with intent to evade tax, supporting invocation of the extended limitation under GST. The Court also noted an apparent failure to discharge reverse charge liability on commissions from foreign booking agencies. The limitation challenge was rejected as covered by the earlier Madras High Court ruling in Tata Play Limited, and the Court further observed that, for the relevant assessment years, even the period for passing orders under the lesser limitation regime had not expired. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Wrongful availment of input tax credit, where credit exceeded GSTR-2A and was utilised in GSTR-3B, was treated as prima facie suppression of facts with intent to evade tax, supporting invocation of the extended limitation under GST. The Court also noted an apparent failure to discharge reverse charge liability on commissions from foreign booking agencies. The limitation challenge was rejected as covered by the earlier Madras High Court ruling in Tata Play Limited, and the Court further observed that, for the relevant assessment years, even the period for passing orders under the lesser limitation regime had not expired. The writ petitions were dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal on merits.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.