Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
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 4811 
Join Channel 
