Time Relevance of Expense: commission deductible when incurred; restructuring transfers, lease obligations upheld; unenforceable sale agreement bars l...
Abuse of dominant position allegations against an exchange found not prima facie; regulator reliance on sectoral expertise upheld and no investigation...
Whether the 01.02.2019 amendment curtailing the time for refund applications could retrospectively extinguish accrued entitlement to refund of accumulated ITC under an inverted duty structure was determined by applying the presumption against retrospectivity to substantive curtailment of vested rights; absent express retrospective operation, the unamended "relevant date" continued to govern periods prior to the amendment, and the refund claims were not time-barred, including for July 2017-December 2018 (also within extended time under a notification) and January-March 2019 under Section 54. The rejection for January-March 2019 for alleged non-receipt of eligible inputs was found unreasoned. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh determination. - HC
Whether the 01.02.2019 amendment curtailing the time for refund applications could retrospectively extinguish accrued entitlement to refund of accumulated ITC under an inverted duty structure was determined by applying the presumption against retrospectivity to substantive curtailment of vested rights; absent express retrospective operation, the unamended "relevant date" continued to govern periods prior to the amendment, and the refund claims were not time-barred, including for July 2017-December 2018 (also within extended time under a notification) and January-March 2019 under Section 54. The rejection for January-March 2019 for alleged non-receipt of eligible inputs was found unreasoned. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh determination. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
