Deductibility for charitable donations affirmed where payments to approved relief funds, even if CSR-driven, qualify under the donation deduction sche...
Mis-declaration in import descriptions must be deliberate to justify confiscation; withheld contemporaneous import documents invalidate value redeterm...
Liability for EPCG export shortfall: duty and interest sustained, but confiscation and penalties quashed where no fraud and causes beyond importer con...
Page of 4807
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5361 to 5380 of 96140 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 17(5)(d) restricts apportionment and blocking of credit solely in relation to goods or services used for construction of immovable property; it therefore does not apply to mere transfer of leasehold rights where no construction activity is shown, and such application is a non-application of mind. Section 74(1) may be invoked only where input tax credit was wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; absent material establishing those elements and where inadvertent ITC use was reversed and tax discharged, a s.74(1) notice is without jurisdiction and relief ensues.
Section 17(5)(d) restricts apportionment and blocking of credit solely in relation to goods or services used for construction of immovable property; it therefore does not apply to mere transfer of leasehold rights where no construction activity is shown, and such application is a non-application of mind. Section 74(1) may be invoked only where input tax credit was wrongly availed or utilised by reason of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; absent material establishing those elements and where inadvertent ITC use was reversed and tax discharged, a s.74(1) notice is without jurisdiction and relief ensues.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4807 
Join Channel 
