Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
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 
