Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
HC held that the taxpayer's refund application for unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) filed on 07.11.2022 for periods prior to 18.07.2022 is maintainable, as it was within the statutory limitation period under Section 54(1). Following the precedent in Patanjali Foods case, the court quashed the department's rejection order, which improperly relied on Circular No.181/13/2022-GST. The refund claim was deemed valid, rejecting the administrative circular's attempt to create arbitrary classification of refund applications, thereby ensuring taxpayer's legal right to claim refund within prescribed timelines.
HC held that the taxpayer's refund application for unutilized Input Tax Credit (ITC) filed on 07.11.2022 for periods prior to 18.07.2022 is maintainable, as it was within the statutory limitation period under Section 54(1). Following the precedent in Patanjali Foods case, the court quashed the department's rejection order, which improperly relied on Circular No.181/13/2022-GST. The refund claim was deemed valid, rejecting the administrative circular's attempt to create arbitrary classification of refund applications, thereby ensuring taxpayer's legal right to claim refund within prescribed timelines.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
