Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
During a factory premises survey, discrepancies in raw material and semi-finished product inventory led to confiscation proceedings under s.130 read with s.122 of the GST Act. The HC ruled that when stock discrepancies are discovered during a survey of a registered dealer, authorities must initiate proceedings under s.73/74 of the GST Act rather than s.130. Following established precedents, the HC determined the respondent's orders dated 16.04.2024 and 23.11.2019 were legally unsustainable. The HC emphasized that inventory irregularities discovered during routine surveys warrant assessment proceedings under s.73/74 rather than the more severe confiscation provisions under s.130. Petition allowed, impugned orders set aside.
During a factory premises survey, discrepancies in raw material and semi-finished product inventory led to confiscation proceedings under s.130 read with s.122 of the GST Act. The HC ruled that when stock discrepancies are discovered during a survey of a registered dealer, authorities must initiate proceedings under s.73/74 of the GST Act rather than s.130. Following established precedents, the HC determined the respondent's orders dated 16.04.2024 and 23.11.2019 were legally unsustainable. The HC emphasized that inventory irregularities discovered during routine surveys warrant assessment proceedings under s.73/74 rather than the more severe confiscation provisions under s.130. Petition allowed, impugned orders set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
