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...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Page of 4789
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
441 to 460 of 95768 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4789
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
