SC: Repeated Anticipatory Bail Pleas Abuse Process and Reduce Litigation to a Gamble  ||  Supreme Court: State Officers Cannot Back Litigants Through Affidavits Against the Law  ||  Supreme Court: Accused Deserves Parity With Discharged Co-Accused if Evidence is Not Stronger  ||  SC Allows Euthanasia of Rabid Stray Dogs if Necessary and Protects Officials Acting in Good Faith  ||  Kerala High Court: University Syndicate Cannot Sue Chancellor as Both Form Same Legal Body  ||  Kerala High Court: Unsigned FIS is Admissible if Informant Confirms its Contents in Court  ||  J&K&L High Court: Purchaser’s Structure on Migrant Land Alone Cannot Block Sale Deed Registration  ||  Supreme Court: Bail Remains the Rule and Jail the Exception, Even under the UAPA Law  ||  Supreme Court: Principle of Res Judicata Also Applies Between Stages of the Same Case  ||  Supreme Court: Govt Servant Has No Right to Old Rule Promotion Just Due to Earlier Vacancies    

Delhi HC: 90 Days Period Prescribed in Rule 117 of CGST Rules Not Mandatory - (06 May 2020)

GOODS AND SERVICES TAX

Delhi High Court has held that Rule 117 of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 which prescribes 90 days for filing for transactional credits, is not mandatory in nature, but is merely directional. The period of three years, as prescribed in the Limitation Act, 1963 will be considered as a reasonable period for availing such transactional credits.

Tags : DELHI HIGH COURT   90 DAYS PERIOD  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved