https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768327 Input tax credit denial under the Orissa VAT Act could not stand where the authority failed to deal with the petitioner's express grounds, including the alternative plea under Section 20(3). The impugned order treated the transactions as paper transactions and rejected credit under Section 20(8)(c), but it did not address issues left open by the earlier coordinate bench. The HC found that the petitioner was entitled to urge those grounds before the authority. The order was set aside and the matter was restored for fresh consideration. en-us Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Apr 2025 08:23:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768327 Input tax credit denial under the Orissa VAT Act could not stand where the authority failed to deal with the petitioner's express grounds, including the alternative plea under Section 20(3). The impugned order treated the transactions as paper transactions and rejected credit under Section 20(8)(c), but it did not address issues left open by the earlier coordinate bench. The HC found that the petitioner was entitled to urge those grounds before the authority. The order was set aside and the matter was restored for fresh consideration. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Fri, 06 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768327