Person chargeable with duty must be the importer at importation; subsequent purchasers cannot be held liable where beneficial owner rules did not appl...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5701 to 5720 of 96406 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Expiry of statutory limitation for challenging a GST order was decisive where the petitioner failed to substantiate lawful availment of input tax credit and did not refute reliance on invoices from a supplier alleged to issue fake invoices; consequence: the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. The adjudicating authority is directed to decide on merits subject to a protective condition requiring the taxpayer to deposit 25% of the disputed tax from its electronic cash register within thirty days, balancing revenue protection with the taxpayers opportunity for merits adjudication.
Expiry of statutory limitation for challenging a GST order was decisive where the petitioner failed to substantiate lawful availment of input tax credit and did not refute reliance on invoices from a supplier alleged to issue fake invoices; consequence: the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. The adjudicating authority is directed to decide on merits subject to a protective condition requiring the taxpayer to deposit 25% of the disputed tax from its electronic cash register within thirty days, balancing revenue protection with the taxpayers opportunity for merits adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.