Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The court held that the denial of input tax credit to the petitioner by the respondent authority requires reconsideration. The respondent failed to consider the petitioner's contention that the payments for which input tax credit was sought were made against the provisional registration number before the permanent registration number was granted. There were no reasons provided for disallowing such credit to the petitioner. Consequently, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration by the respondent authority.
The court held that the denial of input tax credit to the petitioner by the respondent authority requires reconsideration. The respondent failed to consider the petitioner's contention that the payments for which input tax credit was sought were made against the provisional registration number before the permanent registration number was granted. There were no reasons provided for disallowing such credit to the petitioner. Consequently, the matter was remanded for fresh consideration by the respondent authority.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
