Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
The AT dismissed the DGAP's profiteering report and closed proceedings against the Respondent under Section 171, CGST Act, holding there is no admissible material establishing that the Respondent retained an unlawful benefit of input tax credit by failing to reduce prices. The AT noted mixed SKU price movements and absence of document evidence demonstrating overall profiteering; enquiries of 56 recipients showed 50 received ITC-related benefit, one was unregistered, and five were unreachable due to closure/liquidation/death. Consequently the DGAP's concluded profiteering amount was not accepted, no liability was fastened on the Respondent, and the complaint was thereby disposed.
The AT dismissed the DGAP's profiteering report and closed proceedings against the Respondent under Section 171, CGST Act, holding there is no admissible material establishing that the Respondent retained an unlawful benefit of input tax credit by failing to reduce prices. The AT noted mixed SKU price movements and absence of document evidence demonstrating overall profiteering; enquiries of 56 recipients showed 50 received ITC-related benefit, one was unregistered, and five were unreachable due to closure/liquidation/death. Consequently the DGAP's concluded profiteering amount was not accepted, no liability was fastened on the Respondent, and the complaint was thereby disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
