Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
The High Court addressed the issue of Transitional Input Tax Credit time limitation, ruling that availing credit beyond thirty days is inadmissible, leading to tax recovery with interest and penalty. The court discussed the maintainability of a writ petition u/s Article 226 of the Constitution despite alternative remedies. It held that when a writ petition raises a pure legal question without the need for factual investigation, the High Court can entertain it at its discretion. The court can review decisions of subordinate bodies for jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice. Regarding time limitation, the court interpreted the General Clauses Act to calculate the thirty-day period u/s CGST Act, 2017, excluding the appointed day. Consequently, the court allowed the petition.
The High Court addressed the issue of Transitional Input Tax Credit time limitation, ruling that availing credit beyond thirty days is inadmissible, leading to tax recovery with interest and penalty. The court discussed the maintainability of a writ petition u/s Article 226 of the Constitution despite alternative remedies. It held that when a writ petition raises a pure legal question without the need for factual investigation, the High Court can entertain it at its discretion. The court can review decisions of subordinate bodies for jurisdictional errors or violations of natural justice. Regarding time limitation, the court interpreted the General Clauses Act to calculate the thirty-day period u/s CGST Act, 2017, excluding the appointed day. Consequently, the court allowed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.