Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
The appeal was initially rejected on the ground of limitation due to the non-availability of a self-attested copy of the order within the stipulated time frame as per Rule 108 of the UPGST/CGST Rules. However, the High Court, relying on the precedent set in the case of Visible Alpha Solutions India Private Limited, held that an appeal cannot be dismissed solely on the ground of limitation for non-filing of a certified copy of the order. Consequently, the impugned order was quashed, and the matter was remanded to the concerned authority for a fresh decision within two months, after hearing all stakeholders and passing a reasoned and speaking order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
