Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
Business reorganisation requires recognition of successor's modified return; draft orders against dissolved transferor quashed and fresh review direct...
Petitioner alleges compliance with pre-deposit obligations at two appellate stages and seeks relief from recovery; court directed petitioner to make representation to GST authorities proving payment and allowed authorities to verify and call for clarifications. Any sum recovered in excess of the cumulative deposits required at the two appellate stages must be refunded. Court did not determine merits and left substantive decision to the GST authorities, who may examine evidence and take an informed decision on refund and stay-related consequences.
Petitioner alleges compliance with pre-deposit obligations at two appellate stages and seeks relief from recovery; court directed petitioner to make representation to GST authorities proving payment and allowed authorities to verify and call for clarifications. Any sum recovered in excess of the cumulative deposits required at the two appellate stages must be refunded. Court did not determine merits and left substantive decision to the GST authorities, who may examine evidence and take an informed decision on refund and stay-related consequences.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
