Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
The HC held that the impugned order u/s 129 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017 was not timely. Despite the petitioner's appeal mentioning 27.09.2024 as the order date, the HC found the order was made on the 8th day from the notice specifying penalty, violating Section 129(3). Consequently, the order was set aside and quashed, and the petition was disposed of.
The HC held that the impugned order u/s 129 of the Odisha GST Act, 2017 was not timely. Despite the petitioner's appeal mentioning 27.09.2024 as the order date, the HC found the order was made on the 8th day from the notice specifying penalty, violating Section 129(3). Consequently, the order was set aside and quashed, and the petition was disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.