Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
Refusal to rectify the assessment order passed under Rule 142 (5) of the C.G.S.T. Rules, 2017 - denial of the Input Tax Credit (ITC) - The High Court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, noting that the assessing authority had failed to consider relevant legal precedents and a binding Circular issued by the CBIC. Consequently, the Court set aside the order dated 30.01.2024 and directed the assessing authority to reconsider the matter and issue a fresh reasoned order by a specified deadline. Pending the fresh order, the High Court ordered the disputed demand of tax and penalty to remain in abeyance.
Refusal to rectify the assessment order passed under Rule 142 (5) of the C.G.S.T. Rules, 2017 - denial of the Input Tax Credit (ITC) - The High Court found merit in the petitioner's arguments, noting that the assessing authority had failed to consider relevant legal precedents and a binding Circular issued by the CBIC. Consequently, the Court set aside the order dated 30.01.2024 and directed the assessing authority to reconsider the matter and issue a fresh reasoned order by a specified deadline. Pending the fresh order, the High Court ordered the disputed demand of tax and penalty to remain in abeyance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
