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...
Section 153C jurisdiction requires timely deemed search and assessee-specific satisfaction material; otherwise reassessment must use the proper statut...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
681 to 700 of 97820 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Mandatory nationwide e-way bill compliance for inter-State movement of goods took effect only from 1 April 2018, despite rule 138 having provided the operational mechanism earlier. Non-production of an e-way bill for goods intercepted before that date therefore did not justify detention or penalty. Correspondence between the goods, invoice and transport documents, coupled with the absence of discrepancies or material indicating intent to evade tax, supported deletion of the detention proceedings and penalty. The Revenue's challenge against that deletion failed.
Mandatory nationwide e-way bill compliance for inter-State movement of goods took effect only from 1 April 2018, despite rule 138 having provided the operational mechanism earlier. Non-production of an e-way bill for goods intercepted before that date therefore did not justify detention or penalty. Correspondence between the goods, invoice and transport documents, coupled with the absence of discrepancies or material indicating intent to evade tax, supported deletion of the detention proceedings and penalty. The Revenue's challenge against that deletion failed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.