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...
The High Court dealt with a partial rejection of a waiver claim linked to belated filing of GSTR-9 and noted the absence of a specific appellate remedy against the waiver order. As the petitioner had not appeared despite notice, the Court held that one further opportunity should be granted to file a reply and supporting documents before the same authority. It set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, leaving all factual and legal contentions open. No finding was rendered on the merits of the waiver claim under Rule 164(10), and the request was to be reconsidered in light of the clarifications in Circular No. 238/32/2024-GST.
The High Court dealt with a partial rejection of a waiver claim linked to belated filing of GSTR-9 and noted the absence of a specific appellate remedy against the waiver order. As the petitioner had not appeared despite notice, the Court held that one further opportunity should be granted to file a reply and supporting documents before the same authority. It set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration, leaving all factual and legal contentions open. No finding was rendered on the merits of the waiver claim under Rule 164(10), and the request was to be reconsidered in light of the clarifications in Circular No. 238/32/2024-GST.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.