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...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
HC determined GST audit completion timeframe was compliant with Section 65 of CGST Act. Petitioner challenged SCNs under Sections 73 and 74, claiming audit exceeded statutory timeline. Court found additional documents were submitted by petitioner on 09.04.2024, which marked commencement of audit per Section 65 Explanation. Three-month completion requirement ran from this date, not initial notice. Final audit report was filed within prescribed period. While question of whether timeline is mandatory or directory remained open, Court dismissed petition finding audit was timely completed based on actual document submission date. Writ petition dismissed with no merit.
HC determined GST audit completion timeframe was compliant with Section 65 of CGST Act. Petitioner challenged SCNs under Sections 73 and 74, claiming audit exceeded statutory timeline. Court found additional documents were submitted by petitioner on 09.04.2024, which marked commencement of audit per Section 65 Explanation. Three-month completion requirement ran from this date, not initial notice. Final audit report was filed within prescribed period. While question of whether timeline is mandatory or directory remained open, Court dismissed petition finding audit was timely completed based on actual document submission date. Writ petition dismissed with no merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.