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...
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.