Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
GST Authorities invoked penal provisions under Indian Penal Code against the petitioner without invoking penal provisions of GST Act, despite the alleged offences being covered under GST Act. This was done without obtaining sanction u/s 132(6) of GST Act. The court held that GST Act is a special legislation dealing with GST-related procedures, penalties, and offences. Authorities cannot bypass the prescribed procedure for launching prosecution under GST Act by simply invoking IPC provisions without invoking GST Act provisions, especially when allegations constitute offences covered under GST Act. Doing so would amount to bypassing procedural safeguards like obtaining commissioner's sanction u/s 132(6), prejudicing the petitioner. Allowing authorities to adopt such a course would be an abuse of process of law, which cannot be permitted. Consequently, the petition was allowed, quashing the prosecution launched without following due process under GST Act.
GST Authorities invoked penal provisions under Indian Penal Code against the petitioner without invoking penal provisions of GST Act, despite the alleged offences being covered under GST Act. This was done without obtaining sanction u/s 132(6) of GST Act. The court held that GST Act is a special legislation dealing with GST-related procedures, penalties, and offences. Authorities cannot bypass the prescribed procedure for launching prosecution under GST Act by simply invoking IPC provisions without invoking GST Act provisions, especially when allegations constitute offences covered under GST Act. Doing so would amount to bypassing procedural safeguards like obtaining commissioner's sanction u/s 132(6), prejudicing the petitioner. Allowing authorities to adopt such a course would be an abuse of process of law, which cannot be permitted. Consequently, the petition was allowed, quashing the prosecution launched without following due process under GST Act.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.