Depreciation and routine compliance expenses disallowance did not prove inaccurate particulars or misreporting; penalty sustained only on foreign trav...
Page of 4827
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3461 to 3480 of 96536 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC dismissed the writ petition and relegated the petitioner to the statutory appellate remedy under the GST Act, holding that disputed claims of fraudulent input tax credit and counter-allegations involve contested questions of fact requiring document-centric fact-finding by the competent appellate authority rather than judicial resolution in a writ jurisdiction. Noting the petitioner deposited 10% of the disputed tax during proceedings, the HC directed that the appellate authority shall admit and decide the appeal without being inhibited by limitation, and that the period during which the writ was pending be excluded from limitation computation, thereby permitting the petitioner to prosecute the appeal on merits before the appellate forum.
HC dismissed the writ petition and relegated the petitioner to the statutory appellate remedy under the GST Act, holding that disputed claims of fraudulent input tax credit and counter-allegations involve contested questions of fact requiring document-centric fact-finding by the competent appellate authority rather than judicial resolution in a writ jurisdiction. Noting the petitioner deposited 10% of the disputed tax during proceedings, the HC directed that the appellate authority shall admit and decide the appeal without being inhibited by limitation, and that the period during which the writ was pending be excluded from limitation computation, thereby permitting the petitioner to prosecute the appeal on merits before the appellate forum.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
