Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
The HC set aside the impugned demand notices under DRC-01 and held the reasoning insufficient to sustain a tax demand based solely on alleged suppression in GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and GSTR-9C; the respondents must first adduce cogent evidence of turnover suppression before issuing demand. The Court recognised that disproportionate inward versus outward supplies might stem from excess availing of Input Tax Credit, warranting further enquiry. The matter is remitted to the respondent for fresh adjudication; the petitioner is permitted to file a reply with supporting documents. Petition disposed of by remand with liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
The HC set aside the impugned demand notices under DRC-01 and held the reasoning insufficient to sustain a tax demand based solely on alleged suppression in GSTR-1, GSTR-3B and GSTR-9C; the respondents must first adduce cogent evidence of turnover suppression before issuing demand. The Court recognised that disproportionate inward versus outward supplies might stem from excess availing of Input Tax Credit, warranting further enquiry. The matter is remitted to the respondent for fresh adjudication; the petitioner is permitted to file a reply with supporting documents. Petition disposed of by remand with liberty to proceed in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
