Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
No overlapping proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) were established, because the petitioner did not show that any other competent authority had already initiated action on the same subject matter. The Court held that search and seizure under Section 67, including sealing of premises when required, and provisional attachment under Section 83 were within the CGST framework. It further held that statutory remedies existed for release of seized goods and de-sealing, yet the petitioner bypassed those remedies and did not cooperate with summons or the investigation. In these circumstances, the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy barred interference under Article 226, and the writ petition was dismissed.
No overlapping proceedings under Section 6(2)(b) were established, because the petitioner did not show that any other competent authority had already initiated action on the same subject matter. The Court held that search and seizure under Section 67, including sealing of premises when required, and provisional attachment under Section 83 were within the CGST framework. It further held that statutory remedies existed for release of seized goods and de-sealing, yet the petitioner bypassed those remedies and did not cooperate with summons or the investigation. In these circumstances, the availability of an alternative efficacious remedy barred interference under Article 226, and the writ petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
