Condonation of refiling delay refused where repeated defects, lack of diligence and vague explanations defeated the appeal against resolution plan app...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
4401 to 4420 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAAR dismissed the appeal and held that import IGST paid via TR-6 challan is not an admissible document for claiming ITC because a TR-6 is a Treasury payment instrument and not a "bill of entry or any similar document" prescribed under the Customs Act or rules; consequently TR-6 (alone or read with SVB orders/letters) cannot support ITC. A re-assessed bill of entry, however, constitutes a prescribed document under r.36(1)(d) and thus may permit ITC, but such availment is governed by the time-bar in s.16(4) CGST, applied to IGST claims by s.20 IGST Act mutatis mutandis. Appeal dismissed.
The AAAR dismissed the appeal and held that import IGST paid via TR-6 challan is not an admissible document for claiming ITC because a TR-6 is a Treasury payment instrument and not a "bill of entry or any similar document" prescribed under the Customs Act or rules; consequently TR-6 (alone or read with SVB orders/letters) cannot support ITC. A re-assessed bill of entry, however, constitutes a prescribed document under r.36(1)(d) and thus may permit ITC, but such availment is governed by the time-bar in s.16(4) CGST, applied to IGST claims by s.20 IGST Act mutatis mutandis. Appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
