Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC quashed order relating to Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims that were time-barred under Section 16(4) of CGST Act but fell within limitation under Section 16(5). Following precedent from Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries case, Court determined that while ITC claims exceeded initial limitation period under Section 16(4), they remained valid within extended timeframe provided by Section 16(5). Consequently, original tax assessment order, penalties, and interest charges were set aside to extent they denied ITC claims falling within Section 16(5) period. Writ petition allowed, affirming taxpayer's right to claim ITC within extended statutory timeframe despite exceeding initial limitation period.
HC quashed order relating to Input Tax Credit (ITC) claims that were time-barred under Section 16(4) of CGST Act but fell within limitation under Section 16(5). Following precedent from Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries case, Court determined that while ITC claims exceeded initial limitation period under Section 16(4), they remained valid within extended timeframe provided by Section 16(5). Consequently, original tax assessment order, penalties, and interest charges were set aside to extent they denied ITC claims falling within Section 16(5) period. Writ petition allowed, affirming taxpayer's right to claim ITC within extended statutory timeframe despite exceeding initial limitation period.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.