Charitable trust income application permits verified capital expenditure but rejects deferred pre-operative claims and requires reconsideration of con...
Reinsurance premium deductions require established regulatory breaches, while independently acquired software qualifies within the computer depreciati...
Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
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 
