Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
Writ petitions challenging orders-in-original were held not maintainable because an alternate and efficacious statutory appeal existed under section 107 of the GST Act. The petitioners' reliance on an earlier High Court decision concerning the legislative competence and validity of the State levy did not assist them, because the adjudicating authority had separately examined the nature and use of the levy for service tax purposes. The Court found no jurisdictional defect in the authority's action, and held that the correctness of that view, including the effect of the 13.04.2016 circular, should be considered by the appellate authority and, if necessary, the Tribunal. Liberty was granted to file appeals within the time allowed.
Writ petitions challenging orders-in-original were held not maintainable because an alternate and efficacious statutory appeal existed under section 107 of the GST Act. The petitioners' reliance on an earlier High Court decision concerning the legislative competence and validity of the State levy did not assist them, because the adjudicating authority had separately examined the nature and use of the levy for service tax purposes. The Court found no jurisdictional defect in the authority's action, and held that the correctness of that view, including the effect of the 13.04.2016 circular, should be considered by the appellate authority and, if necessary, the Tribunal. Liberty was granted to file appeals within the time allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
