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...
HC upheld penalty u/s 129(3) of WB GST Act 2017 due to deliberate discrepancies in transportation documents. The E-way bill listed an unregistered person (URP) as consignor from Arunachal Pradesh, while delivery challan showed a GST-registered entity as consignor. This mismatch was deemed intentional to conceal the actual recipient's identity and evade GST on rental/lease services of JCB machinery. Court found sufficient evidence of tax evasion intent, noting that using URP details in E-way bill while actual service recipient was GST-registered constituted willful attempt to evade tax liability. Appeal dismissed, affirming 200% penalty of tax payable.
HC upheld penalty u/s 129(3) of WB GST Act 2017 due to deliberate discrepancies in transportation documents. The E-way bill listed an unregistered person (URP) as consignor from Arunachal Pradesh, while delivery challan showed a GST-registered entity as consignor. This mismatch was deemed intentional to conceal the actual recipient's identity and evade GST on rental/lease services of JCB machinery. Court found sufficient evidence of tax evasion intent, noting that using URP details in E-way bill while actual service recipient was GST-registered constituted willful attempt to evade tax liability. Appeal dismissed, affirming 200% penalty of tax payable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
