Aadish Jain

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@AhmedabadPolice @Navrang_PS_Ahd
A chain snatching incident occurred yesterday near HLCollege Bus Stand Nr to AG Police Chowky, on 09.06.2026 between 8:15PM and 9:45PM
requesting the concerned authorities to look into the matter at the earliest. where I should file the complaint

[Jason Hickel @jasonhickel]

This is a really striking paper. It shows that vehicles "Made in Germany" are mostly not made in Germany at all. 

Only 46% of the labour that goes into producing "Made in Germany" vehicles occurs in Germany. The majority of the labour is performed elsewhere (with wages as low as one-fifth the level), and the majority of the emissions occur elsewhere, but the value is disproportionately captured in Germany.

The paper was led by our colleague Laura Pérez-Sánchez at ICTA.
https://t.co/HrGLgvwszN

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@cadeepakgupta_ [email protected]

[CA Ruchita Vaghani @R_N_Vaghani]

🚨GST Returns & E-Way Bills are enough to prove movement of goods — Toll receipts NOT mandatory : Allahabad High Court 👇

1. What documents ARE sufficient?: -
✔️ Valid E-Way Bills
✔️ Tax Invoices
✔️ Payments through banking channels
✔️ Proper disclosure in GSTR-1, GSTR-2A & GSTR-3B

2. Big Relief for Taxpayers: -
Allahabad HC held that absence of toll plaza receipts or weighbridge slips cannot be a ground to allege fake movement of goods if statutory GST documents are intact.

3. No Legal Requirement for Toll Receipts: -
The Court clarified:
📌 GST law does not mandate toll plaza receipts or weighbridge slips as statutory proof.
📌 Drawing adverse inference solely due to their absence is perverse & unsustainable.

4. Case Background: -
🔹 State GST authorities issued SCN u/s 74 (UPGST Act)
🔹 Alleged circular trading & fake ITC
🔹 Taxpayer dealt in agricultural goods & areca nuts
🔹 Complete records & tax payments were already furnished

5. Section 74 = Serious Allegations Need Serious Proof:-
HC reiterated:
⚠️ Section 74 applies only when fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression with intent to evade tax is clearly proved.
🛑 Mere words like “circular trading” or “suspicious transactions” are NOT evidence.

6. Suspicion ≠ Proof: -
The Court firmly held:
📌 Suspicion cannot replace proof
📌 SCN & assessment lacked concrete findings of fraud
📌 Hence, proceedings were invalid

7. Crucial Jurisdiction Ruling ⚖️: -
State GST officers cannot initiate proceedings against a Central GST assessee
❌ No cross-empowerment = No jurisdiction
✔️ Authority must come from explicit statutory notification, not assumptions

8. CBIC Circular Support: -
HC relied on:
📄 CBIC Circular dated 13 Dec 2023
📄 Earlier Division Bench rulings
➡️ Reinforcing limits on departmental powers

9. Final Verdict ✅: -
✔️ SCN, assessment & appellate orders quashed
✔️ Proceedings declared without jurisdiction
✔️ Refund of amounts deposited ordered within 1 month

10. Key Takeaways for GST Litigation: -
🔹 E-way bills + GST returns = strong defence
🔹 Section 74 can’t be invoked casually
🔹 Jurisdiction errors can nullify entire proceedings

📌 A strong precedent against arbitrary GST actions

[House of the Dragon @H_O_T_Dragon]

I haven't read Osho.

But these words are INDISPUTABLE.

[Mind Matter @MindMatter28]

A young student once asked a wise Monk.... MUST READ.. 🧵

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@yourtechgirl24 All

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@abhishekrajaram GSTR

[Adv. Rupesh Sharma @i_rupeshsharma]

🚨 Very Important Judgment: Supreme Court Upholds ITC Even If Selling Dealer Defaults! 🏛️✅

In a landmark order dated October 9, 2025, the Supreme Court of India dismissed the appeals by the Commissioner of Trade & Taxes, Delhi in Commissioner Trade and Tax Delhi vs. M/s Shanti Kiran India (P) Ltd. (CA Nos. 2042-2047/2015 & 9902/2017).

🔑 Key Issue:

Can a bona fide purchasing dealer claim Input Tax Credit (ITC) under the Delhi VAT Act if the selling dealer, though registered at the time of transaction, later fails to deposit the tax with the government?

✅ Supreme Court’s Verdict:

YES – ITC is allowed, provided:

🔸The seller was registered on the date of transaction
🔸The purchaser acted in good faith
🔸Valid tax invoices were issued
🔸No mismatch in Annexure 2A/2B
🔸No evidence of collusion

The Court upheld the Delhi High Court’s reading down of Section 9(2)(g) of the DVAT Act, ruling that denying ITC to a genuine buyer merely because the seller defaulted would violate Article 14 (Equality).

“The remedy for the Department is to recover from the defaulting selling dealer – not to penalize the bona fide purchaser.”

This aligns with the earlier Delhi HC ruling in On Quest Merchandising (2017), which was also upheld by the Supreme Court.

🔗 Parallel to GST Regime – Section 16(2)(c) of CGST Act:

The principle echoes the ongoing debate under Section 16(2)(c) of the CGST Act, which conditions ITC on the supplier having paid the tax to the Government. While the provision appears stricter on paper, this DVAT ruling, combined with judicial trends in GST cases (e.g., Arise India, Suncraft Energy) reinforce that bona fide purchasers cannot be denied ITC solely due to supplier default, unless collusion is proven.

The Supreme Court’s logic of protecting genuine taxpayers and shifting recovery burden to defaulting sellers strengthens the constitutional challenge against rigid interpretation of Section 16(2)(c). A persuasive precedent for GST litigants!

📌 Takeaways:

✅ Maintain proper invoices & records
✅ Verify seller registration at transaction time
✅ ITC safe if no collusion proven
⚠️ Revenue must now pursue defaulting sellers, not deny credit to buyers

The judgment can be accessed here 👇
🔗https://t.co/3dcb1QrUiy

#TaxLaw #ITC #SupremeCourt #DVAT #GST #CGST #Section16 #IndianTaxation #IndirectTax

[The Cinéprism @TheCineprism]

Didn't expect it to be this deep 🎧
https://t.co/1lemX12ifH

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@abhishekrajaram GST

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@abhishekrajaram Section 122 penalty can be levied simultaneously with section 74 penalty ?

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@abhishekrajaram Physical submission of documents are required to be submitted to GST appeal authority ?

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@abhishekrajaram Ims

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@XpressBees_IN
AWB no 94916022232220 status is not updating on the website. Please update. Shipment booked on 19.11.24

[Shreegireesh Jalihal @shreegireesh]

Breaking | Adani Group has bagged a coal block in one of India’s densest forests. Modi govt opened up the block despite objections by its own experts after lobbying by a power industry association. Adani is member of this association.

I report: https://t.co/zo54pfFMIL

[Supriya Sharma @sharmasupriya]

#BREAKING
Remember 2G scam?

SC ordered compulsory spectrum auction in 2012 and Modi rode to power

But in 2023, Modi govt did away with auction for satellite spectrum

Decision coincided with Bharti group donating Rs 150 crore to BJP
https://t.co/TourqUfREl

[Sanjeev Gupta @sanjg2k1]

SBI NEEDED 3 MONTHS TO DO THIS ⁉️ IT WAS DOABLE IN ONE HOUR.⌛
Here's is the complete data https://t.co/oFwJ78Xcoh of #ElectoralBonds sorted party/donor wise. The 1st sheet PARTY SIZE SORTED ENCASHMENT (Pivot Table) is in descending order of total value of encashed bonds. 1/3

[Ashok Kumar Pandey अशोक اشوک @Ashok_Kashmir]

इस युवा की रिपोर्टिंग देखकर वह ज़माना याद आ गया जब राष्ट्रीय चैनलों के पत्रकार सरकार की चाटुकारिता नहीं, पत्रकारिता करते थे।

[Aadish Jain @CaaadishJain]

@MCA21India
The webpage is not navigating dir 3 kyc page. Every time it comes back to home page. Please do needful. Tomorrow is the last date