Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders dated 27.7.2022, 3.1.2023, and 27.11.2024 passed under Section 130 of the GST Act. The court relied on its prior precedent in Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar, which established that when excess stock is found, proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 of UPGST Act are applicable, and Section 130 proceedings cannot be initiated. The case was decided without exchanging pleadings, directly applying the existing judicial interpretation of the statutory provisions.
HC allowed the writ petition, quashing the impugned orders dated 27.7.2022, 3.1.2023, and 27.11.2024 passed under Section 130 of the GST Act. The court relied on its prior precedent in Dinesh Kumar Pradeep Kumar, which established that when excess stock is found, proceedings under Sections 73 and 74 of UPGST Act are applicable, and Section 130 proceedings cannot be initiated. The case was decided without exchanging pleadings, directly applying the existing judicial interpretation of the statutory provisions.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
