Supreme Court: Second Bail Order Must Record Changed Circumstances or Fresh Grounds  ||  SC: Severity of Injury Alone Cannot Prove Attempt to Murder Without Intent to Cause Death  ||  SC: Promissory Estoppel Cannot Be Used to Claim Unintended Benefits, Lays Down Principles  ||  Kerala High Court: No Unrestricted RTI; DPDP Act Strengthens Privacy Framework  ||  Allahabad High Court: Juvenile Offence Case Does Not Bar Govt Job In Adulthood  ||  Gauhati HC: Burden Of Proving Citizenship Stays With Proceedee and Does Not Shift At Any Stage  ||  Delhi HC: Property Disputes Between In-Laws and Daughter-In-Law are Not Exclusively For Family Court  ||  Delhi High Court: After Probate is Granted, A Will Does Not Require Fresh Proof under Section 68  ||  Ker HC: Periodic Replacement and Maintenance of Prosthetic Limb Must Be Included in Compensation  ||  Madras High Court: DNA Test Not Required For Mother to Donate Kidney to Her Son    

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