Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court declined to decide substantive merits of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit because an efficacious alternative remedy by statutory appeal under Section 107 and Rule 109A remained available and unexhausted, applying the principle that writ jurisdiction should not supplant the statutory appellate forum; petitioner was left free to pursue that remedy. The court also held, following Ambika Traders (SC), that notices under the assessment provisions may consolidate multiple financial years where the statute permits a notice 'for any period' or 'for such periods', and found no reason to quash the impugned proceedings; writ petition dismissed.
The High Court declined to decide substantive merits of alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit because an efficacious alternative remedy by statutory appeal under Section 107 and Rule 109A remained available and unexhausted, applying the principle that writ jurisdiction should not supplant the statutory appellate forum; petitioner was left free to pursue that remedy. The court also held, following Ambika Traders (SC), that notices under the assessment provisions may consolidate multiple financial years where the statute permits a notice 'for any period' or 'for such periods', and found no reason to quash the impugned proceedings; writ petition dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
