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...
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Wrongful availment and passing on of input tax credit, wrongful availment of IGST refund under Advance Authorisation scheme. Constitutional validity of Notification No. 09/2023-Central Tax dated 31.03.2023 questioned, whether ultra-vires the CGST Act provisions. Held that the challenged order is dated 21.02.2024, and the challenge is on merits. Appeal lies before the Appellate Authority u/s 107 of the CGST Act to examine questions of fact and law. The petition regarding the impugned orders is not entertained. Regarding initiation of proceedings u/s 74 instead of Section 73 of the CGST Act, the Appellate Authority can examine the questions of law while examining the facts. The challenge to the notification dated 31.03.2023 does not arise as no notice was issued u/s 73 of the CGST Act. The present petition is misconceived and dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
