Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) where the petitioner was found to have availed inadmissible credit based on fictitious invoices issued by non-existent suppliers. The Court held that no Show Cause Notice or personal hearing violated natural justice principles, but the writ petition was not maintainable due to the fraudulent nature of the ITC claim, aligning with precedent restricting writ relief in such cases to protect the exchequer and GST regime. The limitation argument was rejected as the impugned order was validly passed within the prescribed period. The petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within one month, subject to the required pre-deposit.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging the denial of Input Tax Credit (ITC) where the petitioner was found to have availed inadmissible credit based on fictitious invoices issued by non-existent suppliers. The Court held that no Show Cause Notice or personal hearing violated natural justice principles, but the writ petition was not maintainable due to the fraudulent nature of the ITC claim, aligning with precedent restricting writ relief in such cases to protect the exchequer and GST regime. The limitation argument was rejected as the impugned order was validly passed within the prescribed period. The petitioner was granted leave to file an appeal before the Appellate Authority within one month, subject to the required pre-deposit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.