The article discusses how GST authorities are increasingly reversing ITC based on upstream NGTP allegations without proving fraud by the immediate buyer. It highlights judicial views that genuine buyers cannot be burdened with proving unknown upstream transactions.
The article explains common objections raised during GST departmental audits under Section 65, including ITC mismatches, GSTR reconciliation issues, and reverse charge disputes. It also discusses judicial rulings supporting taxpayers in genuine ITC claims.
The article explains how digital adjudication systems, virtual hearings, and online compliance platforms are reshaping India’s corporate regulatory framework. It highlights benefits such as transparency, efficiency, and reduced procedural delays.
Supreme Court upheld restoration of original Committee of Creditors and ruled that IRP could not independently reclassify financial creditors after constitution of CoC under IBC framework.
CESTAT Chennai held that Rule 8 of the Central Excise Valuation Rules applies only when goods are consumed by the assessee or on its behalf. Since the plastic caps were used by the principal manufacturer and not captively consumed by the job worker, the duty demand was set aside.
The Mumbai ITAT held that the appellate authority failed to consider pending writ petitions and interim directions of the Bombay High Court regarding exemption under Section 10(23C)(via). The matter was remanded for reconsideration after final disposal of the writ petitions.
The ITAT Chennai held that exemption under Section 11 cannot be denied merely because Form 10B was not filed along with the return, when it was available before processing under Section 143(1). The Tribunal directed CPC to amend the intimation and consider the audit report.
The Supreme Court dismissed the Revenue’s challenge to depreciation claims on leased assets after the Bombay High Court held that leasing constituted business use under Section 32. The ruling reaffirmed that physical use by the assessee is not necessary where assets are used in the leasing business.
CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax demand raised merely on differences between ST-3 returns and Income Tax Returns without proper examination of records was unsustainable in law.
CESTAT Ahmedabad held that Additional Excise Duty introduced from 11.07.2014 could not be imposed on goods manufactured before the levy came into force, even if cleared later.
