Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
