Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The applicability of the Notification dated 13.09.2012 in the present case, where the goods were seized in 2008-2009, was examined. As per the Notification, the transporter must carry duly signed copies of documents like lorry challan, goods receipt, invoice, etc. during movement. However, the revisionist, registered with the Ministry of Railways, was bound to keep details of consignors and consignees as per a 2006 letter. When the show-cause notice was issued before the assessment order dated 01.09.2009, the 2012 Notification did not exist. Hence, the case must be examined under the provisions applicable on 01.09.2009. Section 49(3), regarding the definition of "dealer" and non-production of title documents, was deleted by the 2012 Notifications with effect from 01.03.2012. The Supreme Court has considered the applicability of these provisions in various judgments. After the 2012 Notifications, the State established checkposts, but no checking was done during the transport of the revisionist's goods by rail. If no checking occurred during transportation, the revisionist, being a transporter, cannot be liable to pay tax without evidence of consignors and consignees. The High Court set aside the order.
The applicability of the Notification dated 13.09.2012 in the present case, where the goods were seized in 2008-2009, was examined. As per the Notification, the transporter must carry duly signed copies of documents like lorry challan, goods receipt, invoice, etc. during movement. However, the revisionist, registered with the Ministry of Railways, was bound to keep details of consignors and consignees as per a 2006 letter. When the show-cause notice was issued before the assessment order dated 01.09.2009, the 2012 Notification did not exist. Hence, the case must be examined under the provisions applicable on 01.09.2009. Section 49(3), regarding the definition of "dealer" and non-production of title documents, was deleted by the 2012 Notifications with effect from 01.03.2012. The Supreme Court has considered the applicability of these provisions in various judgments. After the 2012 Notifications, the State established checkposts, but no checking was done during the transport of the revisionist's goods by rail. If no checking occurred during transportation, the revisionist, being a transporter, cannot be liable to pay tax without evidence of consignors and consignees. The High Court set aside the order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
