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...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
HC allowed the writ petition, setting aside the appeal and assessment orders. The court held that under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, the petitioner was entitled to claim input tax credit for Financial Years 2017-2018 through 2020-2021, which was previously rejected. The credit was sought within the prescribed timeline of 30.11.2021, specifically on 31.10.2019. The matter was remanded to the first respondent to issue a fresh assessment order in accordance with Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions governing input tax credit claims.
HC allowed the writ petition, setting aside the appeal and assessment orders. The court held that under Section 16(4) of the CGST Act, the petitioner was entitled to claim input tax credit for Financial Years 2017-2018 through 2020-2021, which was previously rejected. The credit was sought within the prescribed timeline of 30.11.2021, specifically on 31.10.2019. The matter was remanded to the first respondent to issue a fresh assessment order in accordance with Section 16(5) of the CGST Act, ensuring compliance with statutory provisions governing input tax credit claims.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.