Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
481 to 500 of 95957 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that the petitioner had committed a bona fide error by uploading the GSTIN of the Kerala branch of R-5 instead of its Chennai (Tamil Nadu) branch in GSTR-1, which prevented R-4 from availing Input Tax Credit. Relying on analogous precedents, HC observed that where no revenue loss occurs and the mistake is inadvertent, technicalities should not obstruct legitimate rectification. Given the serious disputes between the petitioner and R-4/R-5, HC kept all inter se contentions open. HC partly allowed the petition and directed R-1 to R-3 to permit the petitioner to amend the relevant GSTR-1 returns within four weeks from receipt of the order.
HC held that the petitioner had committed a bona fide error by uploading the GSTIN of the Kerala branch of R-5 instead of its Chennai (Tamil Nadu) branch in GSTR-1, which prevented R-4 from availing Input Tax Credit. Relying on analogous precedents, HC observed that where no revenue loss occurs and the mistake is inadvertent, technicalities should not obstruct legitimate rectification. Given the serious disputes between the petitioner and R-4/R-5, HC kept all inter se contentions open. HC partly allowed the petition and directed R-1 to R-3 to permit the petitioner to amend the relevant GSTR-1 returns within four weeks from receipt of the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4798
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
