Restriction of Input Tax Credit under Rule 86A applies only to fraudulently or ineligible availed credit; mere wrongful recipient availment is insuffi...
Business reorganisation requires recognition of successor's modified return; draft orders against dissolved transferor quashed and fresh review direct...
An electronic GST penalty order was upheld despite not separately displaying a DIN because it carried a portal-verifiable RFN and had been served through statutory modes recognised under section 169, including the common portal, registered post and e-mail. The Court held that a challenge based only on the absence of the DIN label could not succeed where the communication was traceable and authentic, and relied on the CBIC circular dated 09.06.2025 clarifying that portal-generated communications with a verifiable RFN do not require a separate DIN. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal and exclusion of writ time for limitation purposes.
An electronic GST penalty order was upheld despite not separately displaying a DIN because it carried a portal-verifiable RFN and had been served through statutory modes recognised under section 169, including the common portal, registered post and e-mail. The Court held that a challenge based only on the absence of the DIN label could not succeed where the communication was traceable and authentic, and relied on the CBIC circular dated 09.06.2025 clarifying that portal-generated communications with a verifiable RFN do not require a separate DIN. The writ petition was dismissed, with liberty to pursue the statutory appeal and exclusion of writ time for limitation purposes.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.