Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Vicarious liability for dishonoured company cheques may extend to non-signatory directors where complaints contain foundational responsibility avermen...
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the blocking of the electronic credit ledger and denial of ITC, finding no violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error. Although the petitioner alleged non-availability of documents and lack of opportunity for cross-examination, the court observed that the petitioner's representative opposed re-examination and did not participate, and the adjudication order addressed the petitioner's responses comprehensively. The petitioner failed to utilize the appellate remedy and instead directly approached the HC. The court emphasized the petitioner's initial burden to produce evidence, including toll plaza reports, to substantiate transportation of goods, which was not discharged. Consequently, the State was not obligated to prove the petitioner's claim. The petitioner's reliance on a separate case concerning public auction and refund was deemed inapplicable. No illegality or irregularity was found in the proper officer's order, leading to dismissal of the petition.
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the blocking of the electronic credit ledger and denial of ITC, finding no violation of natural justice or jurisdictional error. Although the petitioner alleged non-availability of documents and lack of opportunity for cross-examination, the court observed that the petitioner's representative opposed re-examination and did not participate, and the adjudication order addressed the petitioner's responses comprehensively. The petitioner failed to utilize the appellate remedy and instead directly approached the HC. The court emphasized the petitioner's initial burden to produce evidence, including toll plaza reports, to substantiate transportation of goods, which was not discharged. Consequently, the State was not obligated to prove the petitioner's claim. The petitioner's reliance on a separate case concerning public auction and refund was deemed inapplicable. No illegality or irregularity was found in the proper officer's order, leading to dismissal of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.