Defined public benefit can retain charitable character; registration renewal requires examining genuine activities and legal compliance, not surplus a...
Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
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.