Online bond platforms may offer overseas-regulated products and tax-specific bonds subject to disclosures, compliance safeguards and revised complianc...
Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
HC dismissed petitioner's writ petition challenging detention of goods and levy of tax and penalty under CGST Act. Court held that impugned order demonstrated due application of mind, recorded factual matrix and petitioner's reply, and provided cogent reasons for rejection. No procedural impropriety, manifest illegality, or violation of natural justice principles was established. Authorities acted within statutory powers under Section 129(3) CGST Act with reasonable appreciation of evidence. Court ruled judicial review under Article 226 does not permit reappreciation of evidence when efficacious alternative remedy exists. Petition lacked merit and dismissed, though petitioner granted liberty to pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 CGST Act 2017.
HC dismissed petitioner's writ petition challenging detention of goods and levy of tax and penalty under CGST Act. Court held that impugned order demonstrated due application of mind, recorded factual matrix and petitioner's reply, and provided cogent reasons for rejection. No procedural impropriety, manifest illegality, or violation of natural justice principles was established. Authorities acted within statutory powers under Section 129(3) CGST Act with reasonable appreciation of evidence. Court ruled judicial review under Article 226 does not permit reappreciation of evidence when efficacious alternative remedy exists. Petition lacked merit and dismissed, though petitioner granted liberty to pursue statutory appeal under Section 107 CGST Act 2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
