Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Page of 4816
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5881 to 5900 of 96301 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.