Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
The HC held that the impugned order failed to apply sub-section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, which was made effective from 1 July 2017 and prescribes that, notwithstanding sub-section (4), a registered person may claim input tax credit for invoices/debit notes relating to FY 2017-18 through FY 2020-21 in any return filed up to 30 November 2021. Because the authority did not consider the implications of s.16(5) when deciding the dispute between the anonymized petitioner and respondent, the HC set aside the decision and remitted the matter to the authority for fresh adjudication in light of s.16(5). The petition was disposed by remand.
The HC held that the impugned order failed to apply sub-section (5) of Section 16 of the CGST Act, which was made effective from 1 July 2017 and prescribes that, notwithstanding sub-section (4), a registered person may claim input tax credit for invoices/debit notes relating to FY 2017-18 through FY 2020-21 in any return filed up to 30 November 2021. Because the authority did not consider the implications of s.16(5) when deciding the dispute between the anonymized petitioner and respondent, the HC set aside the decision and remitted the matter to the authority for fresh adjudication in light of s.16(5). The petition was disposed by remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
