Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders issued under s. 130 read with s. 122 of the UP GST Act that had levied tax and penalty on alleged excess stock. The court held the orders unsustainable in law and directed the revenue authority to refund any amounts deposited by the petitioner, with interest at 4% per annum from the date of deposit until refund. The authority must effect the refund within two months of production of a certified copy of the order. The petition is allowed and the enforcement orders are set aside.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders issued under s. 130 read with s. 122 of the UP GST Act that had levied tax and penalty on alleged excess stock. The court held the orders unsustainable in law and directed the revenue authority to refund any amounts deposited by the petitioner, with interest at 4% per annum from the date of deposit until refund. The authority must effect the refund within two months of production of a certified copy of the order. The petition is allowed and the enforcement orders are set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
