Limitation in customs appeals permits exclusion for bona fide refund proceedings, enabling restoration of Bill of Entry assessment challenges on merit...
Warehousing permission requires deposit at the designated bonded warehouse; unauthorised diversion triggers confiscation, redemption fine and importer...
The HC quashed the attachment of the petitioner's banking account, following precedent established in Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries (2024). The Court determined that the petitioner's claim for input tax credit, while barred under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, was still within the limitation period prescribed by Section 16(5) of the same Act. The Court disposed of the petition on the same grounds as the precedent case, ruling that tax authorities cannot deny ITC claims that fall within the extended limitation period under Section 16(5), despite being outside the standard limitation period under Section 16(4). Petition allowed.
The HC quashed the attachment of the petitioner's banking account, following precedent established in Sri Ganapathi Pandi Industries (2024). The Court determined that the petitioner's claim for input tax credit, while barred under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, was still within the limitation period prescribed by Section 16(5) of the same Act. The Court disposed of the petition on the same grounds as the precedent case, ruling that tax authorities cannot deny ITC claims that fall within the extended limitation period under Section 16(5), despite being outside the standard limitation period under Section 16(4). Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
