Capital Asset Conversion Requires Proven Business Stock Treatment; Paper Consideration in Spousal Flat Transfers Does Not Create Taxable Business Inco...
Human-probability test defeats political donation deduction where banking records mask accommodation-entry fund layering and evidence shows non-genuin...
Commercial property status protects capital-gains exemption when residential-house ownership limits are tested, while agricultural-land character gove...
Investigation deposits refunded after failed customs demands fall outside the statutory appellate pre-deposit interest regime and may attract compensa...
Resolution plan finality extinguishes unquantified operational-creditor claims and pending proceedings unless the approved plan expressly preserves th...
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 
TaxTMI 
of 4894 
