Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The HC set aside both the order passed by the proper officer and the appellate order concerning the petitioner's failure to respond to notices issued under Sections 61 and 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, relating to alleged wrongful utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC). Despite the petitioner's claim of illness preventing response, the court found no sufficient explanation for non-compliance with the scrutiny and show-cause notices. The imposition of interest on the petitioner for availing ITC was noted, though utilization details were unclear. Consequently, the challenge to the rejection of the appeal was allowed, and the petition was disposed of, effectively nullifying the prior adverse orders against the petitioner.
The HC set aside both the order passed by the proper officer and the appellate order concerning the petitioner's failure to respond to notices issued under Sections 61 and 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017, relating to alleged wrongful utilization of Input Tax Credit (ITC). Despite the petitioner's claim of illness preventing response, the court found no sufficient explanation for non-compliance with the scrutiny and show-cause notices. The imposition of interest on the petitioner for availing ITC was noted, though utilization details were unclear. Consequently, the challenge to the rejection of the appeal was allowed, and the petition was disposed of, effectively nullifying the prior adverse orders against the petitioner.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
