Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95955 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court upheld the levy of tax and penalty on the petitioner for fraudulent claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 16 of the GST Act. The petitioner claimed ITC based on non-existent firms, later revealed by investigation. The court held that mere registration of firms does not entitle ITC if no actual supplies were made. Fraud vitiates proceedings, allowing authorities to reclaim wrongly availed benefits. The court found no illegality in the orders and dismissed the petition.
The High Court upheld the levy of tax and penalty on the petitioner for fraudulent claim of Input Tax Credit (ITC) u/s 16 of the GST Act. The petitioner claimed ITC based on non-existent firms, later revealed by investigation. The court held that mere registration of firms does not entitle ITC if no actual supplies were made. Fraud vitiates proceedings, allowing authorities to reclaim wrongly availed benefits. The court found no illegality in the orders and dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.