Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
The High Court addressed penalty u/s 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 following premises search. Relying on precedent, the Court held that penalty proceedings post a search are not warranted. Quashed impugned orders of March 21, 2018 and August 31, 2018, finding them unjustified. Petition allowed based on lack of justification for penalty u/s 129 post-search.
The High Court addressed penalty u/s 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 following premises search. Relying on precedent, the Court held that penalty proceedings post a search are not warranted. Quashed impugned orders of March 21, 2018 and August 31, 2018, finding them unjustified. Petition allowed based on lack of justification for penalty u/s 129 post-search.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.