Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC declined to entertain the writ, finding matters of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit ordinarily unsuitable for writ jurisdiction where complex factual and evidentiary inquiries and the protection of the public exchequer require exhaustion of statutory remedies. The Court held the Petitioner had received notices and filed responses, raised no substantive merits other than non-supply of RUDs, and was relegated to the statutory appellate route under s.107, CGST. The Petitioner is directed to file the appeal with the requisite pre-deposit by 30 November 2025; if so filed, the appeal will be admitted and not dismissed as time-barred. Petition disposed.
The HC declined to entertain the writ, finding matters of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit ordinarily unsuitable for writ jurisdiction where complex factual and evidentiary inquiries and the protection of the public exchequer require exhaustion of statutory remedies. The Court held the Petitioner had received notices and filed responses, raised no substantive merits other than non-supply of RUDs, and was relegated to the statutory appellate route under s.107, CGST. The Petitioner is directed to file the appeal with the requisite pre-deposit by 30 November 2025; if so filed, the appeal will be admitted and not dismissed as time-barred. Petition disposed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.