Composite GST notices, mandatory limitation, and same-subject bar: HC upheld valid notices but quashed overlapping proceedings and unauthorised withho...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3581 to 3600 of 96407 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear that unless and until there is sufficient evidence about the mens area/ intent on the part of the appellant which prove that he knew or had reason to believe that excisable goods with which he is involved, he is transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with such excisable goods, are liable for confiscation, he cannot be penalised under Rule 26. - AT
Levy of Penalty - Perusal of Rule 26 makes it abundantly clear that unless and until there is sufficient evidence about the mens area/ intent on the part of the appellant which prove that he knew or had reason to believe that excisable goods with which he is involved, he is transporting, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with such excisable goods, are liable for confiscation, he cannot be penalised under Rule 26. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
