Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
The HC held that initiation of proceedings under section 129 of the GST Act requires proof of mens rea to evade tax. A minor discrepancy of one digit in the tax invoice and e-way bill did not establish such intent. Relying on precedent emphasizing the necessity of mens rea for penalty imposition, the Court found the impugned orders unsustainable. Consequently, the orders were quashed, and the petition was allowed.
The HC held that initiation of proceedings under section 129 of the GST Act requires proof of mens rea to evade tax. A minor discrepancy of one digit in the tax invoice and e-way bill did not establish such intent. Relying on precedent emphasizing the necessity of mens rea for penalty imposition, the Court found the impugned orders unsustainable. Consequently, the orders were quashed, and the petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.