Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The case pertains to the validity of input tax credit (ITC) availed on construction goods for a building leased to an educational institution. The Supreme Court held that each case involving malls or buildings must undergo a fact-finding inquiry to determine if it satisfies the functionality test of being a 'plant' u/s 17(5)(d). If the building qualifies as a plant, ITC can be allowed on goods and services used in setting up the immovable property. The petitioner was required to satisfy the adjudicating authority whether the building qualified as a plant to avail ITC but failed to submit necessary documents and instead approached the court. The final order was passed, which the petitioner did not challenge. The court dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal and rely on the Supreme Court's decision in the Safari Retreats case.
The case pertains to the validity of input tax credit (ITC) availed on construction goods for a building leased to an educational institution. The Supreme Court held that each case involving malls or buildings must undergo a fact-finding inquiry to determine if it satisfies the functionality test of being a 'plant' u/s 17(5)(d). If the building qualifies as a plant, ITC can be allowed on goods and services used in setting up the immovable property. The petitioner was required to satisfy the adjudicating authority whether the building qualified as a plant to avail ITC but failed to submit necessary documents and instead approached the court. The final order was passed, which the petitioner did not challenge. The court dismissed the petition, allowing the petitioner to file an appeal and rely on the Supreme Court's decision in the Safari Retreats case.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
