Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4894
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
721 to 740 of 97867 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Denial of input tax credit (ITC) was considered where no finding of collusion, fraud, or mala fide conduct existed; the authority invoked non fraud procedure, indicating the transaction was bona fide, so depriving the purchaser of ITC would be arbitrary under Article 14. The court distinguished assessment under non fraud and fraud processes and applied the ratio in Sahil Enterprises to hold the purchaser not liable for the seller's failure to remit collected tax. The impugned order was set aside and ITC of Rs. 22,09,964/- was directed to be allowed forthwith.
Denial of input tax credit (ITC) was considered where no finding of collusion, fraud, or mala fide conduct existed; the authority invoked non fraud procedure, indicating the transaction was bona fide, so depriving the purchaser of ITC would be arbitrary under Article 14. The court distinguished assessment under non fraud and fraud processes and applied the ratio in Sahil Enterprises to hold the purchaser not liable for the seller's failure to remit collected tax. The impugned order was set aside and ITC of Rs. 22,09,964/- was directed to be allowed forthwith.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.