Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 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" ?
GST proceedings based only on mismatch between ITC claimed in...
Fraud-based GST assessment cannot stand without allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; proceedings must follow normal classification.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
GST proceedings based only on mismatch between ITC claimed in GSTR-3B and ITC reflected in GSTR-2A, without any allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, fall under the normal assessment route and not the fraud-based route. The HC held that the notice and orders were issued under the normal provision, and the confirmation depended only on the taxpayer's failure to substantiate the ITC claim. The assessment was set aside and remanded for a fresh order under the normal provision, and the rejection of the waiver application was also set aside with liberty to file a fresh application.
GST proceedings based only on mismatch between ITC claimed in GSTR-3B and ITC reflected in GSTR-2A, without any allegation of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, fall under the normal assessment route and not the fraud-based route. The HC held that the notice and orders were issued under the normal provision, and the confirmation depended only on the taxpayer's failure to substantiate the ITC claim. The assessment was set aside and remanded for a fresh order under the normal provision, and the rejection of the waiver application was also set aside with liberty to file a fresh application.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.