Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
HC upheld cancellation of petitioner's registration under Section 29(2)(e) due to fraudulent misrepresentation of business premises. Despite presenting electricity bills and leave/license agreement, petitioner failed to substantiate actual occupancy through proof of license fee payments or utility charges. Petitioner's inaction in responding to show cause notice, non-appearance before appellate authority, and failure to challenge Bureau of Investigation's spot visit findings proved detrimental. Court found proper officer's inference plausible based on available evidence. The registration cancellation order was deemed neither perverse nor unsupported by evidence, leading to dismissal of writ petition challenging the cancellation order.
HC upheld cancellation of petitioner's registration under Section 29(2)(e) due to fraudulent misrepresentation of business premises. Despite presenting electricity bills and leave/license agreement, petitioner failed to substantiate actual occupancy through proof of license fee payments or utility charges. Petitioner's inaction in responding to show cause notice, non-appearance before appellate authority, and failure to challenge Bureau of Investigation's spot visit findings proved detrimental. Court found proper officer's inference plausible based on available evidence. The registration cancellation order was deemed neither perverse nor unsupported by evidence, leading to dismissal of writ petition challenging the cancellation order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
