Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 95918 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 set aside the impugned order to the extent it denied the petitioner's claim of input tax credit (ITC) under Sections 16(2)(c) and 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts, on the ground that the petitioner could not trace the suppliers involved in the relevant transactions. Relying on precedent where a similar petitioner was granted an opportunity to submit requisite documents, the Court held that the petitioner is entitled to a similar chance to substantiate the ITC claim. The matter is remitted for reconsideration limited to allowing the petitioner to produce supporting evidence in accordance with applicable circulars. The application is disposed of accordingly.
The HC set aside the impugned order to the extent it denied the petitioner's claim of input tax credit (ITC) under Sections 16(2)(c) and 16(4) of the CGST/SGST Acts, on the ground that the petitioner could not trace the suppliers involved in the relevant transactions. Relying on precedent where a similar petitioner was granted an opportunity to submit requisite documents, the Court held that the petitioner is entitled to a similar chance to substantiate the ITC claim. The matter is remitted for reconsideration limited to allowing the petitioner to produce supporting evidence in accordance with applicable circulars. The application is disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
