Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
Input tax credit should not be denied to a bona fide purchasing dealer solely because the registered selling dealer, despite receiving tax, failed to file returns. Where the purchaser has paid tax against a valid tax invoice, recovery of unpaid tax should be pursued against the defaulting seller. Action against the purchaser remains available where material establishes collusion. Applying this principle, the discussed High Court decision quashed the demand based on alleged excess input tax credit for the relevant financial year, while preserving the authorities' right to recover dues from the selling dealer in accordance with law.
Input tax credit should not be denied to a bona fide purchasing dealer solely because the registered selling dealer, despite receiving tax, failed to file returns. Where the purchaser has paid tax against a valid tax invoice, recovery of unpaid tax should be pursued against the defaulting seller. Action against the purchaser remains available where material establishes collusion. Applying this principle, the discussed High Court decision quashed the demand based on alleged excess input tax credit for the relevant financial year, while preserving the authorities' right to recover dues from the selling dealer in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
