Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
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.