Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
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 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
