Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
HC quashed proceedings initiated under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act 2017 regarding goods intercepted without state E-way bill. While tax invoice, Central E-way bill and builty accompanied the goods, state E-way bill was absent. Following precedents in similar cases, HC held that during 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018, E-way bill requirement under UPGST Act was not enforceable. Therefore, seizure proceedings against petitioner were without jurisdiction. The impugned orders were unsustainable in law as the requirement for state E-way bill documentation had not come into force during the relevant period. Petition allowed with proceedings quashed.
HC quashed proceedings initiated under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act 2017 regarding goods intercepted without state E-way bill. While tax invoice, Central E-way bill and builty accompanied the goods, state E-way bill was absent. Following precedents in similar cases, HC held that during 01.02.2018 to 31.03.2018, E-way bill requirement under UPGST Act was not enforceable. Therefore, seizure proceedings against petitioner were without jurisdiction. The impugned orders were unsustainable in law as the requirement for state E-way bill documentation had not come into force during the relevant period. Petition allowed with proceedings quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
