GST Section 140(1) Second Proviso Upheld: Constitutional Validity Confirmed, Dealer Rights Balanced with Regulatory Purpose The HC rejected the challenge to the GST provision, finding the second proviso to section 140(1) constitutional. The court determined that the provision ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
GST Section 140(1) Second Proviso Upheld: Constitutional Validity Confirmed, Dealer Rights Balanced with Regulatory Purpose
The HC rejected the challenge to the GST provision, finding the second proviso to section 140(1) constitutional. The court determined that the provision did not unreasonably restrict dealer rights and served a legitimate regulatory purpose within the state's taxation framework. The petition was dismissed, upholding the legislative intent and validity of the challenged statutory provision.
The Gujarat High Court in 2018 (3) TMI 1265 addressed a challenge to seccond proviso to sub-section (1) of section 140 of the Gujarat Goods and Service Tax. The petitioner argued that the provision deprived a dealer of vested rights and imposed unreasonable restrictions. Notice was made returnable on 19.04.2018, with the Advocate General also being notified.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
