Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
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.