Madras High Court held that ITC in respect of delayed GSTR-3B allowed provided GSTR-3B is filed on or before 30.11.2021. accordingly, claim of ITC barred by limitation in terms of section 16(4) of CGST Act but within period prescribed in terms of section 16(5) is allowed.
The petitioner has preferred the present appeal mainly contesting that respondent-department erred in denying claim of ITC for delay in filing GSTR-3B returns since the delay was on account of Covid-19 outbreak.
Madras HC directs passport renewal for petitioner abroad, contingent on undertaking to surrender before EOCC court and cooperate in pending Customs Act criminal case.
Madras High Court held that matter of leviability of 2% TDS on reimbursable expenses in case of Customs House Agent [CHA] is remanded back since assessee failed to produce supporting documentary evidence.
NCLT had no discretion to appoint an IRP other than the one proposed by the applicant, unless disciplinary proceedings were pending. As the NCLT’s order substituting the recommended IRP lacked statutory support, it was quashed and the matter remitted for fresh consideration.
The Madras High Court mandates an online application for GST order rectification clarifying that a timely offline application serves to meet the limitation period under Section 161 of the GST Act.
Assessee’s remedy lied in recovering the amounts wrongly disbursed through the liquidation process, with the liquidator assisting in such recovery. Upon full satisfaction of the 1st Respondent’s dues, the attachment should stand vacated.
Madras High Court refused to interfere in order of the Disciplinary Authority imposing stoppage of increment of Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes since there is no perversity in the orders. Accordingly, writ dismissed.
Madras High Court held that verbatim reproduction of contents of show cause notice without independent reasoning for arriving at conclusion results into violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, matter remanded back to file of first respondent for fresh consideration.
Madras High Court held that passing of ex-parte order and imposing penalty under section 125 of the GST Act is not sustainable since GST notice was uploaded only in the GST portal and not served physically. Accordingly, matter remanded back for fresh consideration.
