Fraud-based GST assessment cannot stand without allegations of fraud, wilful misstatement or suppression; proceedings must follow normal classificatio...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96092 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The High Court addressed the issue of determining the value of supply in a job work scenario, challenging an order u/s 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner received goods for job work from outside the state, but faced interception and detention while returning the consignment after completion. The Court noted that if the value of supply cannot be determined u/s 15(1), it should be as prescribed. The petitioner did not disclose the contract, affecting value determination. The proper officer did not assess the transaction value under Section 15(1). The Court remanded the matter to the appellate authority for reevaluation, directing the petitioner to disclose all job work documents within 3 weeks. Petition disposed off.
The High Court addressed the issue of determining the value of supply in a job work scenario, challenging an order u/s 107 of the WBGST/CGST Act, 2017. The petitioner received goods for job work from outside the state, but faced interception and detention while returning the consignment after completion. The Court noted that if the value of supply cannot be determined u/s 15(1), it should be as prescribed. The petitioner did not disclose the contract, affecting value determination. The proper officer did not assess the transaction value under Section 15(1). The Court remanded the matter to the appellate authority for reevaluation, directing the petitioner to disclose all job work documents within 3 weeks. Petition disposed off.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.