Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
HC held that adjudicating authority must consider GSTR-9 annual returns when evaluating Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims, rather than solely relying on discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A returns. The term "reconciliation" in Section 44 implies potential rectification of errors in GSTR-3B through annual returns. Court emphasized that dismissing GSTR-9 filed within extended limitation period would prejudice assessee's rights and render Section 44(1) redundant. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication considering appellant's GSTR-9 submissions, with direction to verify voluntary payment of Rs.6,20,322 claimed during annual return filing but not reflected in GST portal.
HC held that adjudicating authority must consider GSTR-9 annual returns when evaluating Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims, rather than solely relying on discrepancies between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A returns. The term "reconciliation" in Section 44 implies potential rectification of errors in GSTR-3B through annual returns. Court emphasized that dismissing GSTR-9 filed within extended limitation period would prejudice assessee's rights and render Section 44(1) redundant. Matter remanded for fresh adjudication considering appellant's GSTR-9 submissions, with direction to verify voluntary payment of Rs.6,20,322 claimed during annual return filing but not reflected in GST portal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.