Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
The Delhi High Court reviewed a case concerning excess Input Tax Credit claimed by a taxpayer by comparing GSTR-2A with GSTR-3B. The court noted the lack of cooperation from the taxpayer and discrepancies in the ITC data despite a special audit. The court referred to Sections 73(7) and 73(9) of the CGST/DGST Act regarding tax notices and penalties. The court found the officer did not properly consider the detailed reply and supporting documents provided by the taxpayer. Consequently, the court set aside the order dated 27.04.2024, ruling in favor of the petitioner and disposing of the petition.
The Delhi High Court reviewed a case concerning excess Input Tax Credit claimed by a taxpayer by comparing GSTR-2A with GSTR-3B. The court noted the lack of cooperation from the taxpayer and discrepancies in the ITC data despite a special audit. The court referred to Sections 73(7) and 73(9) of the CGST/DGST Act regarding tax notices and penalties. The court found the officer did not properly consider the detailed reply and supporting documents provided by the taxpayer. Consequently, the court set aside the order dated 27.04.2024, ruling in favor of the petitioner and disposing of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
