Arrest safeguards require disclosed grounds, relative intimation and transit remand, while duplicate prosecution under the CGST framework is unsustain...
Document Identification Number defects can invalidate GST assessments, with delayed challenges entertained conditionally where patent irregularities e...
Windmill commissioning evidence supported higher depreciation where grid connection and electricity generation proved operational use before the relev...
Pharmaceutical promotion and transfer-pricing comparability principles limited disallowances, while uncorroborated search allegations and unsupported ...
Business expenditure substantiation supports scrap credits, statutory payments and expense claims, while depreciation requires proof of actual busines...
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying...
Transfer of goods between own units without sale shouldn't attract interest/penalty. Authorities must give reasons as per CBIC circular & court precedents.
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying interest and penalty, despite the goods being transferred between the petitioner's establishments, not sold. The court relied on CBIC's circular and previous judgments in Dhabriya Polywood Ltd. and Orson Holdings Company Ltd., which granted benefit of doubt and considered lack of ill-intent, respectively. The impugned orders were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh de novo order, assigning detailed reasons after hearing the petitioner, considering the cited decisions.
The respondent authority failed to provide reasons for levying interest and penalty, despite the goods being transferred between the petitioner's establishments, not sold. The court relied on CBIC's circular and previous judgments in Dhabriya Polywood Ltd. and Orson Holdings Company Ltd., which granted benefit of doubt and considered lack of ill-intent, respectively. The impugned orders were quashed and set aside, and the matter was remanded for a fresh de novo order, assigning detailed reasons after hearing the petitioner, considering the cited decisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
