Arrest safeguards and transit remand requirements invalidated detention following inter-State transfer without communicated grounds or magistrate auth...
Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and summary in Form DRC-07 for wrongfully claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase of four motor cars, which was ineligible u/s 17(5) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was unaware of the notices due to the introduction of a new "View Additional Notices and Orders" feature on the GST portal, which was not adequately communicated, resulting in a violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner had purchased four motor cars for passenger service and mistakenly claimed ITC on these purchases, which was not permissible as the vehicles were intended for personal use. The petitioner voluntarily reversed the wrongly availed ITC in their March 2023 return before the financial year's end. However, the respondent passed the assessment order after issuing pre-show cause notice and show cause notice. The High Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration, providing the petitioner an opportunity to substantiate their claim.
The petitioner challenged the assessment order and summary in Form DRC-07 for wrongfully claiming Input Tax Credit (ITC) on the purchase of four motor cars, which was ineligible u/s 17(5) of the CGST/TNGST Act, 2017. The petitioner was unaware of the notices due to the introduction of a new "View Additional Notices and Orders" feature on the GST portal, which was not adequately communicated, resulting in a violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner had purchased four motor cars for passenger service and mistakenly claimed ITC on these purchases, which was not permissible as the vehicles were intended for personal use. The petitioner voluntarily reversed the wrongly availed ITC in their March 2023 return before the financial year's end. However, the respondent passed the assessment order after issuing pre-show cause notice and show cause notice. The High Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the respondent for fresh consideration, providing the petitioner an opportunity to substantiate their claim.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.