Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
HC examined proceedings under Section 73 of UP GST Act regarding disputed input tax credit claims. The authority initially rejected certificates filed per Government Order dated 27.12.2022, claiming absence of GSTN details. Upon review, HC found GSTN numbers were clearly mentioned in submitted certificates. Given this material discrepancy in assessment, HC remanded the matter to original authority for fresh consideration. Authority directed to review all materials, conduct stakeholder hearings, and issue reasoned order within three months of certified order copy production. Petition allowed through remand, emphasizing need for comprehensive review of documentation and proper procedural compliance in input tax credit determination.
HC examined proceedings under Section 73 of UP GST Act regarding disputed input tax credit claims. The authority initially rejected certificates filed per Government Order dated 27.12.2022, claiming absence of GSTN details. Upon review, HC found GSTN numbers were clearly mentioned in submitted certificates. Given this material discrepancy in assessment, HC remanded the matter to original authority for fresh consideration. Authority directed to review all materials, conduct stakeholder hearings, and issue reasoned order within three months of certified order copy production. Petition allowed through remand, emphasizing need for comprehensive review of documentation and proper procedural compliance in input tax credit determination.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.