Clean slate principle extinguishes uncrystallised operational claims and bars continuation of pending recovery and arbitral proceedings after plan app...
Works contract classification governs composite layout-development contracts where VAT-paid goods are transferred alongside construction and infrastru...
Specified income tax exemption for pollution control body remains conditional on non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return filin...
HC held that the recovery of tax dues from the petitioner was premature and in violation of statutory provisions under Sections 78 and 79 of CGST/BGST Act, 2017. The Recovery Officer was mandated to wait three months from the date of service order before initiating recovery proceedings. The impugned orders rejecting Input Tax Credit claims were set aside due to retrospective amendment under Section 16(5). Respondent authorities were directed to refund the recovered amount of Rs.50,75,214/- within two weeks, with 12% per annum interest in case of default. The second appeal could not be preferred as the Tribunal was not constituted, effectively suspending the appeal timeline.
HC held that the recovery of tax dues from the petitioner was premature and in violation of statutory provisions under Sections 78 and 79 of CGST/BGST Act, 2017. The Recovery Officer was mandated to wait three months from the date of service order before initiating recovery proceedings. The impugned orders rejecting Input Tax Credit claims were set aside due to retrospective amendment under Section 16(5). Respondent authorities were directed to refund the recovered amount of Rs.50,75,214/- within two weeks, with 12% per annum interest in case of default. The second appeal could not be preferred as the Tribunal was not constituted, effectively suspending the appeal timeline.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
