Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.