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...
The HC quashed the impugned Order-in-Original covering tax periods from 2017-18 through July 2023, remanding the matter to the third respondent for fresh consideration. This decision was predicated on the petitioner's expressed intention to avail benefits under the Amnesty Scheme provided in Section 128(A) of the CGST Act, which specifically applies to financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The court determined that remittal was the appropriate remedy to allow proper consideration of the Amnesty Scheme's applicability to the relevant portion of the assessment periods, directing the third respondent to reconsider the matter in accordance with law.
The HC quashed the impugned Order-in-Original covering tax periods from 2017-18 through July 2023, remanding the matter to the third respondent for fresh consideration. This decision was predicated on the petitioner's expressed intention to avail benefits under the Amnesty Scheme provided in Section 128(A) of the CGST Act, which specifically applies to financial years 2017-18, 2018-19, and 2019-20. The court determined that remittal was the appropriate remedy to allow proper consideration of the Amnesty Scheme's applicability to the relevant portion of the assessment periods, directing the third respondent to reconsider the matter in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
