Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
Proceeds of crime: provisional attachment confirmed; equivalent value attachment and acquisition date fair market value upheld, Covid exclusion preser...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5741 to 5760 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" ?
A demand based on belated availment of input tax credit under Section 16(4) could not stand unchanged after the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5) into the GST enactments from 01.07.2017. The Court found that the very defect relied on in the show cause notice and impugned order had been cured by the retrospective amendment, so the matter required reconsideration on merits. The impugned order was quashed and the case was remitted for fresh adjudication, with liberty to the taxpayer to file a proper reply with supporting documents.
A demand based on belated availment of input tax credit under Section 16(4) could not stand unchanged after the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5) into the GST enactments from 01.07.2017. The Court found that the very defect relied on in the show cause notice and impugned order had been cured by the retrospective amendment, so the matter required reconsideration on merits. The impugned order was quashed and the case was remitted for fresh adjudication, with liberty to the taxpayer to file a proper reply with supporting documents.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.