Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
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 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
