Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
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.