Pre-existing operational debt disputes require genuine evidence, while undirected running-account payments may be appropriated on a first-in-first-out...
Agency in CNG distribution makes outlet operators commission agents, rendering taxable Business Auxiliary Service rather than purchasing goods for res...
Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
The HC ruled that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme for waiver of late fees for filing GSTR-1 and GSTR-9 returns beyond Rs. 10,000/-. The Court found it improper to create differential treatment between taxpayers who filed returns before the amnesty notifications (No. 7/2023 and 25/2023) were issued and those who filed within the period prescribed by the notifications. Following precedents from HP HC in RT Pharma and Kerala HC in Anishia Chandrakanth, the Court held that the spirit of the notifications was to encourage return filing, and taxpayers should not be prejudiced merely because they filed returns prior to the notification date. Petition disposed of accordingly.
The HC ruled that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the Amnesty Scheme for waiver of late fees for filing GSTR-1 and GSTR-9 returns beyond Rs. 10,000/-. The Court found it improper to create differential treatment between taxpayers who filed returns before the amnesty notifications (No. 7/2023 and 25/2023) were issued and those who filed within the period prescribed by the notifications. Following precedents from HP HC in RT Pharma and Kerala HC in Anishia Chandrakanth, the Court held that the spirit of the notifications was to encourage return filing, and taxpayers should not be prejudiced merely because they filed returns prior to the notification date. Petition disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.