Jurisdictional facts in certificate-of-origin discrepancies can support customs show-cause proceedings, leaving factual explanations for departmental ...
Market value for captive electricity consumption follows industrial consumer tariffs, supporting profit computation for the power generation deduction...
The HC examined the validity of recovery proceedings in light of the non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal and compliance with Section 107(6) of the CGST Act, alongside the applicability of Circular No. 224/18/2024 GST dated 11th July, 2024. The petitioner had availed benefits under the said circular and deposited 10% of the demanded amount. The court held that since the petitioner complied with the prescribed guidelines by making the requisite deposit, the recovery notices issued on 28th February, 19th March, and 25th March 2025 were quashed. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
The HC examined the validity of recovery proceedings in light of the non-constitution of the GST Appellate Tribunal and compliance with Section 107(6) of the CGST Act, alongside the applicability of Circular No. 224/18/2024 GST dated 11th July, 2024. The petitioner had availed benefits under the said circular and deposited 10% of the demanded amount. The court held that since the petitioner complied with the prescribed guidelines by making the requisite deposit, the recovery notices issued on 28th February, 19th March, and 25th March 2025 were quashed. The petition was accordingly disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.