Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The petitioner had wrongly availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) which was reversed in the GSTR-3B filed for February 2020. Despite admitting the reversal, the second respondent included the demand for the wrongly availed ITC in the DRC-07 notice. The High Court held that the reason provided by the second respondent for including the demand was unacceptable. The demand under item No.3 of the impugned DRC-07 notice was set aside as erroneous since the first respondent had already ordered the reversal to be treated as payment u/s 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. For other claims, the petitioner was granted liberty to approach the concerned Authority seeking amnesty.
The petitioner had wrongly availed Input Tax Credit (ITC) which was reversed in the GSTR-3B filed for February 2020. Despite admitting the reversal, the second respondent included the demand for the wrongly availed ITC in the DRC-07 notice. The High Court held that the reason provided by the second respondent for including the demand was unacceptable. The demand under item No.3 of the impugned DRC-07 notice was set aside as erroneous since the first respondent had already ordered the reversal to be treated as payment u/s 73 of the CGST Act, 2017. For other claims, the petitioner was granted liberty to approach the concerned Authority seeking amnesty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
