Coercive recovery during GST searches is restrained pending scrutiny, preserving normal business operations and requiring adherence to investigation g...
COVID-19 limitation exclusion and destination-specific e-way bills govern revisional timelines and penalties for undocumented third-party plywood deli...
Questions arising from miscellaneous application orders cannot challenge unaltered Tribunal findings, leaving the original order separately challengea...
Transfer-pricing comparability filters require fresh arm's-length analysis, while delayed receivables need separate reconsideration with working-capit...
Page of 4879
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 97567 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Section 129(3) detention and penalty provisions should not be applied solely because an e-way bill has expired where invoices and transport documents are accurate. An unrebutted vehicle breakdown, coupled with no independent enquiry, does not support an adverse inference that goods were moved to evade tax. In these circumstances, expiry alone does not establish intent to evade tax, and detention, consequential tax and penalty cannot be sustained; deposited amounts are refundable in accordance with law.
Section 129(3) detention and penalty provisions should not be applied solely because an e-way bill has expired where invoices and transport documents are accurate. An unrebutted vehicle breakdown, coupled with no independent enquiry, does not support an adverse inference that goods were moved to evade tax. In these circumstances, expiry alone does not establish intent to evade tax, and detention, consequential tax and penalty cannot be sustained; deposited amounts are refundable in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.