Blocked input tax credit for resort construction remains unavailable; interest follows actual utilisation, while delayed payment attracts statutory pe...
Duplicate PAN allocation requires record verification and deactivation reasons before assessment-related transactions can be attributed to an assessee...
Faceless assessment safeguards require requested personal hearings and adequate final show-cause response time, failing which reassessment is required...
HC determined that mere non-completion of part-B of e-way bill does not automatically warrant penalty under Section 129 of U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The court found no evidence of tax evasion attempt by the petitioner. Without a specific finding regarding intentional tax evasion, the penalty levy was deemed unsustainable. Consistent with prior judicial precedents, the court emphasized that procedural non-compliance alone cannot justify punitive action. The impugned order was consequently set aside, and the petition was allowed, effectively quashing the penalty imposed by the tax authorities.
HC determined that mere non-completion of part-B of e-way bill does not automatically warrant penalty under Section 129 of U.P. G.S.T. Act, 2017. The court found no evidence of tax evasion attempt by the petitioner. Without a specific finding regarding intentional tax evasion, the penalty levy was deemed unsustainable. Consistent with prior judicial precedents, the court emphasized that procedural non-compliance alone cannot justify punitive action. The impugned order was consequently set aside, and the petition was allowed, effectively quashing the penalty imposed by the tax authorities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
