Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 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.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
