TaxTMI Login
🎉 Festive Offer: Flat 15% off on all plans! →⚡ Don’t Miss Out: Limited-Time Offer →
TaxTMI 
Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Section 73/74 procedures required for tax and penalty assessments; section 130 cannot be invoked for survey discrepancies</h1> <h3>Additional Commissioner Grade-2 & Anr. Versus M/s. Dayal Product.</h3> SC declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment which held that tax and penalty proceedings arising from discrepancies found during a survey ... Imposition of tax and penalty u/s 130 of the GST Act - it was held by High Court that 'The issue in hand is no more res integra. This Court in various cases has held that at the time of survey, if some discrepancy in stock is found against the registered dealer, then the proceedings under sections 73/74 of the GST Act ought to have been initiated, instead of section 130 of the GST Act.' - HELD THAT:- It is not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment/order passed by the High Court. 1. 'Delay condoned.' 2. The Court stated that it is 'not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment/order passed by the High Court.' 3. 'The special leave petition is, accordingly, dismissed.' 4. The Court clarified that the impugned judgment/order and the dismissal of this special leave petition 'will not come in the way of the petitioners in taking recourse to appropriate remedies in accordance with law.' 5. 'Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.' The disposition reflects deference to the High Court's decision and leaves open statutory or procedural remedies available to the petitioners despite dismissal. The Court afforded condonation of delay but declined substantive intervention.
TaxTMI 
