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 High Court addressed the challenge to notifications extending the time limit for issuance of orders u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017, due to the "force majeure" condition of Covid-19. The Court noted that amendments introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, retrospectively effective from 01.07.2017, allowed registered persons to claim input tax credit for financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21, subject to conditions prescribed in the newly inserted Sections 16(5) and 16(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the show-cause notice issued against the petitioners became redundant. The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the competent jurisdictional officer for passing an appropriate order, disposing of the petition.
The High Court addressed the challenge to notifications extending the time limit for issuance of orders u/s 73 of the CGST/AGST Act, 2017, due to the "force majeure" condition of Covid-19. The Court noted that amendments introduced by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, retrospectively effective from 01.07.2017, allowed registered persons to claim input tax credit for financial years 2017-18 to 2020-21, subject to conditions prescribed in the newly inserted Sections 16(5) and 16(6) of the CGST Act, 2017. Consequently, the show-cause notice issued against the petitioners became redundant. The Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter to the competent jurisdictional officer for passing an appropriate order, disposing of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
