Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
HC dismissed the petitioner's claim for input tax credit despite non-filing of returns under Section 39 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 within prescribed time limits. Although Covid-19 pandemic prevailed during 2020-21 and Supreme Court extended limitation periods for appeals and proceedings, the legislature deliberately chose not to extend the return filing deadline under Section 39 beyond November 30, 2021, evidenced by subsequent insertion of Section 16(5). Court held that since constitutional validity of the provision was unchallenged and legislature was conscious of pandemic situation yet maintained the deadline, petitioner's contention for benefit of input tax credit could not be accepted. Petition dismissed for failure to comply with statutory filing requirements.
HC dismissed the petitioner's claim for input tax credit despite non-filing of returns under Section 39 of WBGST/CGST Act, 2017 within prescribed time limits. Although Covid-19 pandemic prevailed during 2020-21 and Supreme Court extended limitation periods for appeals and proceedings, the legislature deliberately chose not to extend the return filing deadline under Section 39 beyond November 30, 2021, evidenced by subsequent insertion of Section 16(5). Court held that since constitutional validity of the provision was unchallenged and legislature was conscious of pandemic situation yet maintained the deadline, petitioner's contention for benefit of input tax credit could not be accepted. Petition dismissed for failure to comply with statutory filing requirements.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.