Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
The petitioner had unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,42,15,906/- under the VAT Act for the period from 1st April 2017 to 30th June 2017, which was carried forward to the GST regime by filing Form GST TRAN 1. Subsequently, the petitioner reversed the ITC in the Electronic Credit Ledger by filing Form DRC-03. The High Court, relying on its previous decision in R. N. Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., directed the respondent authorities to process the petitioner's application for refund of Rs.2,42,15,906/- along with statutory interest payable u/s 38 of the VAT Act, as the petitioner had not availed any credit amount carried forward to GST. The authorities were directed to complete the exercise within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
The petitioner had unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) of Rs.2,42,15,906/- under the VAT Act for the period from 1st April 2017 to 30th June 2017, which was carried forward to the GST regime by filing Form GST TRAN 1. Subsequently, the petitioner reversed the ITC in the Electronic Credit Ledger by filing Form DRC-03. The High Court, relying on its previous decision in R. N. Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., directed the respondent authorities to process the petitioner's application for refund of Rs.2,42,15,906/- along with statutory interest payable u/s 38 of the VAT Act, as the petitioner had not availed any credit amount carried forward to GST. The authorities were directed to complete the exercise within 12 weeks from the date of receipt of the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.