Electronic WhatsApp evidence without authentication or independent corroboration cannot sustain an unexplained-investment addition based on third-part...
Mutual current-account transactions excluded from deemed dividend treatment where no fresh borrowing arose; unsupported unsecured-loan addition also f...
HC quashed the impugned order denying refund of IGST to the petitioner-assessee and directed grant of refund. It held that mere suspicion of excess ITC availment cannot justify withholding refund through a notice under Rule 92(3) CGST Rules when no discrepancy in the refund claim is established. Relying on SC principles, HC held that initiation of recovery proceedings for excess ITC requires issuance of a proper show cause notice under Sections 73 or 74 CGST Act, with adherence to natural justice. As no such notice existed and the audit report did not indicate wrongful ITC for FY 2019-20, non-grant of refund was held unsustainable.
HC quashed the impugned order denying refund of IGST to the petitioner-assessee and directed grant of refund. It held that mere suspicion of excess ITC availment cannot justify withholding refund through a notice under Rule 92(3) CGST Rules when no discrepancy in the refund claim is established. Relying on SC principles, HC held that initiation of recovery proceedings for excess ITC requires issuance of a proper show cause notice under Sections 73 or 74 CGST Act, with adherence to natural justice. As no such notice existed and the audit report did not indicate wrongful ITC for FY 2019-20, non-grant of refund was held unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
