https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255034 The Gujarat HC reiterated that the Tribunal could decide the second appeals on merits even though the first appellate authority had dismissed them for non-payment of predeposit, because the appellants had also challenged the assessment orders and argued the merits before the Tribunal. It also affirmed that input tax credit may be denied where the dealer fails to prove the genuineness of the purchases and actual movement of goods; retrospective cancellation of the vendor's registration does not by itself determine the issue. The burden to establish genuine transactions remained on the credit claimant, and billing entries without proof of transport or delivery were insufficient. en-us Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255034 The Gujarat HC reiterated that the Tribunal could decide the second appeals on merits even though the first appellate authority had dismissed them for non-payment of predeposit, because the appellants had also challenged the assessment orders and argued the merits before the Tribunal. It also affirmed that input tax credit may be denied where the dealer fails to prove the genuineness of the purchases and actual movement of goods; retrospective cancellation of the vendor's registration does not by itself determine the issue. The burden to establish genuine transactions remained on the credit claimant, and billing entries without proof of transport or delivery were insufficient. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=255034