Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
741 to 760 of 95875 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
HC held that under West Bengal GST Rules, 2017, a physical tax invoice is mandatory during goods transportation. While electronic display was attempted, it did not constitute statutory compliance with Rule 138A(1)(a). The court noted no evidence of tax evasion intent and referenced prior precedent in Ashok Sharma case. Critically, the revenue authority did not dispute tax invoice authenticity or allege tax payment default. Consequently, the court set aside the penalty order, finding Section 129 invocation unjustified without demonstrable tax evasion intention. The appellate authority's order affirming the original penalty was quashed, and the petitioner was deemed entitled to penalty refund.
HC held that under West Bengal GST Rules, 2017, a physical tax invoice is mandatory during goods transportation. While electronic display was attempted, it did not constitute statutory compliance with Rule 138A(1)(a). The court noted no evidence of tax evasion intent and referenced prior precedent in Ashok Sharma case. Critically, the revenue authority did not dispute tax invoice authenticity or allege tax payment default. Consequently, the court set aside the penalty order, finding Section 129 invocation unjustified without demonstrable tax evasion intention. The appellate authority's order affirming the original penalty was quashed, and the petitioner was deemed entitled to penalty refund.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
