Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
HC upheld seizure of goods under GST Act due to petitioner's failure to establish actual physical movement of goods from West Bengal/Assam to Delhi via Kanpur. Following precedent from SC in Ecom Gill Coffee Trading, burden of proof in original proceedings lies with assessee to demonstrate genuine transactions and physical movement of goods. Petitioner failed to provide essential evidence like truck numbers or toll receipts documenting the journey. Court affirmed that under-valuation with intent to evade tax justifies seizure under Section 129 of GST Act. Seizure was deemed lawful as petitioner failed to declare true value of goods and provide supporting documentation. Petition dismissed as no grounds found for interference with impugned order.
HC upheld seizure of goods under GST Act due to petitioner's failure to establish actual physical movement of goods from West Bengal/Assam to Delhi via Kanpur. Following precedent from SC in Ecom Gill Coffee Trading, burden of proof in original proceedings lies with assessee to demonstrate genuine transactions and physical movement of goods. Petitioner failed to provide essential evidence like truck numbers or toll receipts documenting the journey. Court affirmed that under-valuation with intent to evade tax justifies seizure under Section 129 of GST Act. Seizure was deemed lawful as petitioner failed to declare true value of goods and provide supporting documentation. Petition dismissed as no grounds found for interference with impugned order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
