Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Petitioner sought quashing of intimation blocking input tax credit, alleging forged invoices without actual supply of goods or services. Competent officer had reason to believe the input tax credit claim was fraudulent u/r 86A of GST Rules, 2017. Court held that impugned notices/intimation were within jurisdiction and in accordance with GST Act and Rules. No grounds found to interfere with intimation and notices. Writ petition dismissed.
Petitioner sought quashing of intimation blocking input tax credit, alleging forged invoices without actual supply of goods or services. Competent officer had reason to believe the input tax credit claim was fraudulent u/r 86A of GST Rules, 2017. Court held that impugned notices/intimation were within jurisdiction and in accordance with GST Act and Rules. No grounds found to interfere with intimation and notices. Writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4780
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
