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...
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging an appellate order that had concurrently rejected the Appellant's appeal on both non-compliance with the pre-deposit obligation under Section 107(6) of the GST Act, 2017 and on merits. The Court distinguished earlier Bench orders that condemned dismissal solely for physical non-deposit without direction, finding the impugned order here decisively addressed substantive issues as well as the technical default. Because the merits findings were supported and no misdirection or illegality justified interference or remand, the Court concluded that setting aside the order in toto or ordering a fresh hearing was unwarranted and therefore dismissed the petition.
The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging an appellate order that had concurrently rejected the Appellant's appeal on both non-compliance with the pre-deposit obligation under Section 107(6) of the GST Act, 2017 and on merits. The Court distinguished earlier Bench orders that condemned dismissal solely for physical non-deposit without direction, finding the impugned order here decisively addressed substantive issues as well as the technical default. Because the merits findings were supported and no misdirection or illegality justified interference or remand, the Court concluded that setting aside the order in toto or ordering a fresh hearing was unwarranted and therefore dismissed the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.