Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3301 to 3320 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC quashed the original and appellate orders under the CGST regime because a material factual claim regarding reversal and reclassification of input tax credit before the show cause notice had not been properly considered. The petitioner had raised the point earlier, but it was rejected for want of documentary support; however, the respondent later confirmed the correctness of that submission before the Court. On that limited basis, the Court held that the foundation of the impugned orders required reconsideration and remanded the matter to the adjudicatory authority for fresh decision expeditiously, leaving all merits open.
The HC quashed the original and appellate orders under the CGST regime because a material factual claim regarding reversal and reclassification of input tax credit before the show cause notice had not been properly considered. The petitioner had raised the point earlier, but it was rejected for want of documentary support; however, the respondent later confirmed the correctness of that submission before the Court. On that limited basis, the Court held that the foundation of the impugned orders required reconsideration and remanded the matter to the adjudicatory authority for fresh decision expeditiously, leaving all merits open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
