Packing-material input credits support inverted-duty refunds for packaged tea, while rate-reduction and concessional-supply circulars remain inapplica...
Government road-restoration services for commercial pipeline work attract reverse-charge GST, while portal-issued proceedings remain valid without a p...
Section 74 penalty for input tax credit retained despite non-payment to suppliers requires a show-cause notice that specifically identifies the material facts allegedly wilfully suppressed and the statutory basis for penalty. Mere breach of the payment condition for input tax credit, or detection during audit, does not by itself establish wilful suppression; Revenue bears the burden of proof. Suppression also requires identification of the undisclosed information and the return, statement, report or document requiring its disclosure. Fresh audit-based grounds cannot be introduced at the appellate stage or through Tribunal submissions. The penalty proceedings were void ab initio and the penalty was set aside, while liability for balance interest remained.
Section 74 penalty for input tax credit retained despite non-payment to suppliers requires a show-cause notice that specifically identifies the material facts allegedly wilfully suppressed and the statutory basis for penalty. Mere breach of the payment condition for input tax credit, or detection during audit, does not by itself establish wilful suppression; Revenue bears the burden of proof. Suppression also requires identification of the undisclosed information and the return, statement, report or document requiring its disclosure. Fresh audit-based grounds cannot be introduced at the appellate stage or through Tribunal submissions. The penalty proceedings were void ab initio and the penalty was set aside, while liability for balance interest remained.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
