Customs valuation and classification require comparable evidence and assessment of imported goods in their actual condition, invalidating related pena...
Terminal gate verification for transshipment containers shifts to operators, while Customs controls and discrepancy reporting requirements remain mand...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
361 to 380 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC invalidated a GST assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 due to two fatal defects: absence of the assessing officer's signature and missing Document Identification Number (DIN). Following precedents established in A.V. Bhanoji Row and M/s. SRK Enterprises, the Court affirmed that an officer's signature cannot be dispensed with, and Sections 160 and 169 of CGST Act, 2017 cannot rectify such deficiency. Regarding the DIN requirement, the Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal, which held that orders without DIN numbers are non-est and invalid, consistent with CBIC circulars. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was set aside and the petition disposed of.
The HC invalidated a GST assessment order in Form GST DRC-07 due to two fatal defects: absence of the assessing officer's signature and missing Document Identification Number (DIN). Following precedents established in A.V. Bhanoji Row and M/s. SRK Enterprises, the Court affirmed that an officer's signature cannot be dispensed with, and Sections 160 and 169 of CGST Act, 2017 cannot rectify such deficiency. Regarding the DIN requirement, the Court relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Pradeep Goyal, which held that orders without DIN numbers are non-est and invalid, consistent with CBIC circulars. Consequently, the impugned assessment order was set aside and the petition disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.