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 directed respondents to extend industrial promotion policy benefits to petitioner within 3 months. While respondents acknowledged petitioner's construction investment per appellate authority's order dated 05/01/2022, they denied benefits under Clauses 9(a) and 9(b) of 22/06/2018 policy, citing ineligibility under 2014 policy. Court noted that post-GST implementation, State issued circular dated 22/06/2018 modifying previous policy. Finding respondents' denial unjustified, HC mandated compliance with appellate authority's order, requiring extension of benefits as per modified policy provisions.
HC directed respondents to extend industrial promotion policy benefits to petitioner within 3 months. While respondents acknowledged petitioner's construction investment per appellate authority's order dated 05/01/2022, they denied benefits under Clauses 9(a) and 9(b) of 22/06/2018 policy, citing ineligibility under 2014 policy. Court noted that post-GST implementation, State issued circular dated 22/06/2018 modifying previous policy. Finding respondents' denial unjustified, HC mandated compliance with appellate authority's order, requiring extension of benefits as per modified policy provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4886 
