Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Necessary-party requirements limit impleadment of independent entities, while deferred consideration does not create an appealable adverse determinati...
Food supplement classification requires common parlance and authoritative tests, preventing treatment as proprietary Ayurvedic medicines without suppo...
Specified regulatory authority income receives conditional tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income character, and return f...
Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-filing...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
601 to 620 of 95918 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that initiation of proceedings under section 130 of the UPGST Act based on the discovery of excess stock during a survey is impermissible. The Court reaffirmed that such findings warrant proceedings under sections 73 or 74 of the GST Act instead, as section 130 is not applicable in cases of excess stock. Consequently, the impugned order initiating proceedings under section 130 was quashed and set aside. The petition was allowed, clarifying that enforcement actions under section 130 cannot be invoked solely on the basis of excess stock detected during a survey.
The HC held that initiation of proceedings under section 130 of the UPGST Act based on the discovery of excess stock during a survey is impermissible. The Court reaffirmed that such findings warrant proceedings under sections 73 or 74 of the GST Act instead, as section 130 is not applicable in cases of excess stock. Consequently, the impugned order initiating proceedings under section 130 was quashed and set aside. The petition was allowed, clarifying that enforcement actions under section 130 cannot be invoked solely on the basis of excess stock detected during a survey.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
