Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
A High Court decision on tax litigation reiterated that condonation of delay depends only on sufficient cause, and prolonged administrative inaction, unexplained gaps and file movement without justification do not warrant indulgence; the State is held to the same diligence standard as any litigant. It also reaffirmed that review jurisdiction is narrow and cannot be used for rehearing unless there is an apparent error or comparable ground. On the tax issue, the Court applied strict construction of the notification and held that denatured spirit is distinct from ethyl alcohol; because the 30.03.2002 notification covered only rectified spirit, neutral spirit and ethyl alcohol, it did not impose entry tax on denatured spirit.
A High Court decision on tax litigation reiterated that condonation of delay depends only on sufficient cause, and prolonged administrative inaction, unexplained gaps and file movement without justification do not warrant indulgence; the State is held to the same diligence standard as any litigant. It also reaffirmed that review jurisdiction is narrow and cannot be used for rehearing unless there is an apparent error or comparable ground. On the tax issue, the Court applied strict construction of the notification and held that denatured spirit is distinct from ethyl alcohol; because the 30.03.2002 notification covered only rectified spirit, neutral spirit and ethyl alcohol, it did not impose entry tax on denatured spirit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
