Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
The HC dismissed the writ petition under Article 226 for excess availment of Input Tax Credit where the petitioner failed to establish that suppliers filed requisite GSTR-1 for March 2019 and where no procedural infirmity in the impugned demand order was demonstrated. The Court found undue delay in institution and numbering of the petition, noting it was presented on 07.08.2025 but numbered only on 13.10.2025, and observed the petition was filed on the last day for seeking condonation of delay in appeal. Dismissal was without prejudice to the petitioner's liberty to file an appeal within 15 days, with no pre-deposit required as the assessed tax had already been paid.
The HC dismissed the writ petition under Article 226 for excess availment of Input Tax Credit where the petitioner failed to establish that suppliers filed requisite GSTR-1 for March 2019 and where no procedural infirmity in the impugned demand order was demonstrated. The Court found undue delay in institution and numbering of the petition, noting it was presented on 07.08.2025 but numbered only on 13.10.2025, and observed the petition was filed on the last day for seeking condonation of delay in appeal. Dismissal was without prejudice to the petitioner's liberty to file an appeal within 15 days, with no pre-deposit required as the assessed tax had already been paid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.