Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
The AAAR rejected the appellant's appeal against a ruling concerning GST on rent received from Govt SWCBH as time-barred. Though the appellant claimed they never received communication of the original order, evidence showed the ruling was emailed on 12.02.2024 to the appellant's email address (provided in their Form GST ARA-01). Per Section 100(2) of CGST Act, appeals must be filed within 30 days, with provision for extension up to another 30 days for sufficient cause. Since the order was communicated on 12.02.2024, the appeal should have been filed by 13.03.2024. Without valid justification for the 22-day delay, the appeal was dismissed.
The AAAR rejected the appellant's appeal against a ruling concerning GST on rent received from Govt SWCBH as time-barred. Though the appellant claimed they never received communication of the original order, evidence showed the ruling was emailed on 12.02.2024 to the appellant's email address (provided in their Form GST ARA-01). Per Section 100(2) of CGST Act, appeals must be filed within 30 days, with provision for extension up to another 30 days for sufficient cause. Since the order was communicated on 12.02.2024, the appeal should have been filed by 13.03.2024. Without valid justification for the 22-day delay, the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.