Concessional Basic Customs Duty on Ethernet switches: classification as enterprise switches upheld, challenge dismissed for lack of substantial law qu...
Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
A HC held that the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5), with a non obstante clause overriding Section 16(4), permitted a registered person to avail input tax credit for the specified financial years if the Section 39 return was filed up to 30.11.2021. Because the return here had been filed on 28.11.2020 for the January to March 2020 period, the claim fell within that extended statutory window and could not be rejected as time-barred under Section 16(4). The impugned order and summary order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication under Section 16(5), leaving other contentions open.
A HC held that the retrospective insertion of Section 16(5), with a non obstante clause overriding Section 16(4), permitted a registered person to avail input tax credit for the specified financial years if the Section 39 return was filed up to 30.11.2021. Because the return here had been filed on 28.11.2020 for the January to March 2020 period, the claim fell within that extended statutory window and could not be rejected as time-barred under Section 16(4). The impugned order and summary order were set aside, and the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication under Section 16(5), leaving other contentions open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.