Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
HC upheld the rejection of the s.161 application and dismissed the challenge to the orders under s.73 of the respective GST enactments insofar as the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 is found to be a detailed adjudicatory determination not warranting exercise of s.161 remedial jurisdiction. The court held that the s.161 rejection is sustainable. The Respondent is directed to pass a fresh order thereafter, conditioned upon the Petitioner's compliance with the stipulated requirements imposed by the Respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly, with no further interference in the impugned assessment order absent such compliance.
HC upheld the rejection of the s.161 application and dismissed the challenge to the orders under s.73 of the respective GST enactments insofar as the impugned order dated 25.02.2025 is found to be a detailed adjudicatory determination not warranting exercise of s.161 remedial jurisdiction. The court held that the s.161 rejection is sustainable. The Respondent is directed to pass a fresh order thereafter, conditioned upon the Petitioner's compliance with the stipulated requirements imposed by the Respondent. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly, with no further interference in the impugned assessment order absent such compliance.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
