Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Merchant banker regulation consolidates registration, governance, capital, reporting, outsourcing and investor-protection requirements under an update...
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the notice in Form ASMT-10 issued by the state authorities for blocking the electronic credit/cash ledger. The court held that the state authorities acted within their powers by blocking the input tax credit (ITC) u/r 86A of the GST Rules, 2017, as they had reasons to believe that the ITC of Rs. 13.10 crores was fraudulently availed. The court clarified that u/r 86A, the authorities can block the debit of an amount equivalent to the fraudulently availed ITC from the electronic credit ledger, irrespective of whether the ITC was available or already utilized. The issuance of Form DRC-01A by the central authorities for Rs. 71,798/- and remittance of the same did not determine the entire issue raised in Form ASMT-10 by the state authorities.
The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the notice in Form ASMT-10 issued by the state authorities for blocking the electronic credit/cash ledger. The court held that the state authorities acted within their powers by blocking the input tax credit (ITC) u/r 86A of the GST Rules, 2017, as they had reasons to believe that the ITC of Rs. 13.10 crores was fraudulently availed. The court clarified that u/r 86A, the authorities can block the debit of an amount equivalent to the fraudulently availed ITC from the electronic credit ledger, irrespective of whether the ITC was available or already utilized. The issuance of Form DRC-01A by the central authorities for Rs. 71,798/- and remittance of the same did not determine the entire issue raised in Form ASMT-10 by the state authorities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.