Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
HC found detention of vehicle and goods under Section 129 was improper. Physical verification confirmed correct quantity and weight of goods against three invoices, with no discrepancy in broad product classifications. Inspecting authority exceeded scope by scrutinizing detailed specifications (pipe size, shutter, TMT Bar dimensions) not required in invoices. While product classification issues could be addressed in separate adjudication proceedings, current detention was unwarranted as there was no evidence of tax evasion or fact suppression. Court ordered release of vehicle and goods within four days of order service. Matter disposed with directive to authorities to comply with release order.
HC found detention of vehicle and goods under Section 129 was improper. Physical verification confirmed correct quantity and weight of goods against three invoices, with no discrepancy in broad product classifications. Inspecting authority exceeded scope by scrutinizing detailed specifications (pipe size, shutter, TMT Bar dimensions) not required in invoices. While product classification issues could be addressed in separate adjudication proceedings, current detention was unwarranted as there was no evidence of tax evasion or fact suppression. Court ordered release of vehicle and goods within four days of order service. Matter disposed with directive to authorities to comply with release order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.