Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
The High Court held that a belated GST appeal concerning reconciliation of input tax credit mismatch could not be rejected on limitation alone where the records showed possible inconsistency in IGST, CGST and SGST credit availment and the authorities had not verified whether the disputed credits and payments were correctly accounted for. Because factual reconciliation was necessary to determine whether excess or short credit had been availed and whether the claimed payments had been given proper effect, the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh disposal on merits without reference to limitation, subject to an additional deposit by the petitioner. If that condition was not met, the authorities were left free to proceed in accordance with law.
The High Court held that a belated GST appeal concerning reconciliation of input tax credit mismatch could not be rejected on limitation alone where the records showed possible inconsistency in IGST, CGST and SGST credit availment and the authorities had not verified whether the disputed credits and payments were correctly accounted for. Because factual reconciliation was necessary to determine whether excess or short credit had been availed and whether the claimed payments had been given proper effect, the matter was remitted to the appellate authority for fresh disposal on merits without reference to limitation, subject to an additional deposit by the petitioner. If that condition was not met, the authorities were left free to proceed in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.