Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
HC allowed the writ petition filed by the assessee, holding that the disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC) under s.17(5) CGST Act on insurance premium was without jurisdiction and based on an erroneous factual premise. The revenue had treated the insurance policy as motor vehicle insurance, whereas the record clearly showed it was for stock, premises, STFI cover, earthquake risk, and manufacturing equipment, which are not covered by the ITC restriction under s.17(5). As all other proposed additions had been dropped and only this ITC disallowance remained, the HC held that the impugned assessment order and notice were vitiated by incorrect assumptions of fact. The impugned order and notice were quashed and set aside.
HC allowed the writ petition filed by the assessee, holding that the disallowance of Input Tax Credit (ITC) under s.17(5) CGST Act on insurance premium was without jurisdiction and based on an erroneous factual premise. The revenue had treated the insurance policy as motor vehicle insurance, whereas the record clearly showed it was for stock, premises, STFI cover, earthquake risk, and manufacturing equipment, which are not covered by the ITC restriction under s.17(5). As all other proposed additions had been dropped and only this ITC disallowance remained, the HC held that the impugned assessment order and notice were vitiated by incorrect assumptions of fact. The impugned order and notice were quashed and set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
