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 adjudicated writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Clause 2 of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022 issued under Section 54(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, concerning refund of unutilised input tax credit under the inverted duty structure. Concurring with the view of another HC, it held that the Circular is ultra vires to the extent it retrospectively applies restrictions introduced by the Notification dated 13.07.2022 to all refund applications filed on or after 18.07.2022. The HC found no distinguishing circumstance or justification advanced by the revenue. Accordingly, the writ petitions were allowed, and the proceedings initiated vide notice dated 04.06.2024 were quashed.
The HC adjudicated writ petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Clause 2 of Circular No. 181/13/2022-GST dated 10.11.2022 issued under Section 54(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, concerning refund of unutilised input tax credit under the inverted duty structure. Concurring with the view of another HC, it held that the Circular is ultra vires to the extent it retrospectively applies restrictions introduced by the Notification dated 13.07.2022 to all refund applications filed on or after 18.07.2022. The HC found no distinguishing circumstance or justification advanced by the revenue. Accordingly, the writ petitions were allowed, and the proceedings initiated vide notice dated 04.06.2024 were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
