Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
HC ruled in favor of petitioner seeking permission to revise GSTR-3B returns for July-November 2017. The case centered on transitional ITC claims under Section 140 of CGST Act 2017. Court acknowledged system limitations, noting TRAN-01 facility was available only from August 25, 2017, despite GST implementation from July 1, 2017. The delay in ITC availability forced petitioner to discharge liability through cash payments. HC emphasized technical glitches shouldn't penalize compliant taxpayers, particularly those under inverted duty structure. The ruling permits revision of returns, allowing proper ITC utilization despite initial system constraints.
HC ruled in favor of petitioner seeking permission to revise GSTR-3B returns for July-November 2017. The case centered on transitional ITC claims under Section 140 of CGST Act 2017. Court acknowledged system limitations, noting TRAN-01 facility was available only from August 25, 2017, despite GST implementation from July 1, 2017. The delay in ITC availability forced petitioner to discharge liability through cash payments. HC emphasized technical glitches shouldn't penalize compliant taxpayers, particularly those under inverted duty structure. The ruling permits revision of returns, allowing proper ITC utilization despite initial system constraints.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.