Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 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.