Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
Petitioner admitted wrongful availment and retention of excess...
Interest on Wrongful Input Tax Credit is mandatory where excess transitional credit was retained and later reversed, and related objections were rejected.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
Petitioner admitted wrongful availment and retention of excess transitional input tax credit and later reversed it; interest liability for wrongful availment is mandatory under the applicable GST interest provisions and was computed for the period of retention. The adjudicating and appellate authorities considered and rejected petitioner's contentions that interest required a separate show-cause notice, should be computed only on net tax, or that mere portal reflection did not constitute utilisation; both orders were upheld and the petition dismissed.
Petitioner admitted wrongful availment and retention of excess transitional input tax credit and later reversed it; interest liability for wrongful availment is mandatory under the applicable GST interest provisions and was computed for the period of retention. The adjudicating and appellate authorities considered and rejected petitioner's contentions that interest required a separate show-cause notice, should be computed only on net tax, or that mere portal reflection did not constitute utilisation; both orders were upheld and the petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.