Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
The case involved a challenge to a penalty imposed u/s 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Acts. The court held that without proof of intent to evade tax, such penalties lack legal basis. The petitioner had presented all documents during seizure, except one, which was later provided. The court found no factual support for the alleged tax evasion intent. The order dated July 20, 2024, was quashed, directing release of the vehicle and goods within two weeks. The High Court disposed of the petition.
The case involved a challenge to a penalty imposed u/s 129 of the Goods and Service Tax Acts. The court held that without proof of intent to evade tax, such penalties lack legal basis. The petitioner had presented all documents during seizure, except one, which was later provided. The court found no factual support for the alleged tax evasion intent. The order dated July 20, 2024, was quashed, directing release of the vehicle and goods within two weeks. The High Court disposed of the petition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
