Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
The petitioners sought transfer of unutilized input tax credit available in their ledgers as on 02.06.2014 to the AP GST regime. The court held that Section 56 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 deals with refund of excess tax collected, but is inapplicable to unutilized input tax credit, which is not excess tax paid. Consequently, the impugned demand orders in Form GST DRC-07 issued by the respondent were set aside, and the petition was allowed. The court clarified that the petitioners' only option was not to seek a refund, as Section 56 did not cover unutilized input tax credit.
The petitioners sought transfer of unutilized input tax credit available in their ledgers as on 02.06.2014 to the AP GST regime. The court held that Section 56 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014 deals with refund of excess tax collected, but is inapplicable to unutilized input tax credit, which is not excess tax paid. Consequently, the impugned demand orders in Form GST DRC-07 issued by the respondent were set aside, and the petition was allowed. The court clarified that the petitioners' only option was not to seek a refund, as Section 56 did not cover unutilized input tax credit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.