Concessional penalty for search-disclosed unreconciled jewellery applies where substantive disclosure conditions are met despite omission from origina...
The HC dismissed the petitioner's appeal under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 solely on the ground of delay without accounting for the time excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, constituting an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction. Consequently, the appellate order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with law, allowing the petitioner the benefit of exclusion under Section 14. Additionally, the concurrent adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner (in conducting Audit) despite the pendency of appeal proceedings was held to be arbitrary and unsustainable, violating principles of natural justice and judicial discipline. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was quashed. Petition allowed.
The HC dismissed the petitioner's appeal under Section 107(1) of the CGST Act, 2017 solely on the ground of delay without accounting for the time excluded under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, constituting an erroneous exercise of jurisdiction. Consequently, the appellate order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh consideration in accordance with law, allowing the petitioner the benefit of exclusion under Section 14. Additionally, the concurrent adjudication by the Assistant Commissioner (in conducting Audit) despite the pendency of appeal proceedings was held to be arbitrary and unsustainable, violating principles of natural justice and judicial discipline. The order passed by the Assistant Commissioner was quashed. Petition allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.