Fraud-based GST assessment cannot stand without allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; proceedings must follow normal classificatio...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96092 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.