Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Page of 4784
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95673 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking permission to rectify/amend the GST number of the purchaser in GSTR-1 return after the expiration of the limitation period u/s 37(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court held that if a person submits an erroneous GSTR-1 and does not correct it within the timeline, the subsequent GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B would also reflect the erroneous information, leading to cascading effects. The time limitation u/ss 37(1) and 37(3) is directly linked to Section 16(4), which allows input tax credit to be availed till the due date of furnishing the return u/s 39 for the month of September following the end of the financial year or furnishing of the annual return, whichever is earlier. The petitioner could not rectify the error beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the GST Act.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner seeking permission to rectify/amend the GST number of the purchaser in GSTR-1 return after the expiration of the limitation period u/s 37(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court held that if a person submits an erroneous GSTR-1 and does not correct it within the timeline, the subsequent GSTR-2A and GSTR-3B would also reflect the erroneous information, leading to cascading effects. The time limitation u/ss 37(1) and 37(3) is directly linked to Section 16(4), which allows input tax credit to be availed till the due date of furnishing the return u/s 39 for the month of September following the end of the financial year or furnishing of the annual return, whichever is earlier. The petitioner could not rectify the error beyond the statutory time limit prescribed under the GST Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4784
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
