Section 80P business attribution: ITAT allows deduction on investment interest and ancillary receipts, but excludes staff-loan and other non-eligible ...
Wrongful availment and distribution of input tax credit was interfered with because the competent authority had not considered the petitioner's audit report and other material on record. The petitioner claimed the Section 65(6) audit report gave a clean chit for the disputed input tax credit distributed by the ISD for 2018-19 and 2019-20, and the respondents placed no rebuttal to that plea. The High Court held that the impact of the audit report required adjudication, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter for fresh decision after considering both sides' submissions. All merits, including the show cause notice and objections, were left open.
Wrongful availment and distribution of input tax credit was interfered with because the competent authority had not considered the petitioner's audit report and other material on record. The petitioner claimed the Section 65(6) audit report gave a clean chit for the disputed input tax credit distributed by the ISD for 2018-19 and 2019-20, and the respondents placed no rebuttal to that plea. The High Court held that the impact of the audit report required adjudication, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter for fresh decision after considering both sides' submissions. All merits, including the show cause notice and objections, were left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
