Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5561 to 5580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
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.