Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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 
