Invoice-based recovery claims remain time-barred despite separate winding-up proceedings, absent valid acknowledgment or part-payment of the disputed ...
Extended limitation fails without specific suppression allegations, while overseas employee secondment remains taxable as manpower supply within norma...
Time-share accommodation classification excludes Club or Association Service where purchasers receive contractual occupancy rights without genuine mem...
CENVAT credit for trading requires reversal, while taxable-service rental credit remains proportionately available and limitation issues await resolut...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 95833 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 upheld the levy of GST and penalty on the petitioner for failing to generate and upload Part B of the E-Way bill, specifically the vehicle details, in violation of Section 129 of the GST Act and Rule 138 of the CGST Rules. The Court affirmed that the primary responsibility to generate Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 lies with the registered person initiating the movement of goods exceeding Rs. 50,000 in value. The petitioner's contention that the transporter was liable to complete Part B was rejected. The petitioner failed to generate Part B before transporting goods valued at Rs. 7,62,247 over 800 km, rendering the Part A invalid and non-compliant. The delay of three days in updating Part B was held as a substantial violation, not a minor error. Consequently, the impugned order imposing GST and penalty was affirmed, and the petition was dismissed.
The HC upheld the levy of GST and penalty on the petitioner for failing to generate and upload Part B of the E-Way bill, specifically the vehicle details, in violation of Section 129 of the GST Act and Rule 138 of the CGST Rules. The Court affirmed that the primary responsibility to generate Part B of FORM GST EWB-01 lies with the registered person initiating the movement of goods exceeding Rs. 50,000 in value. The petitioner's contention that the transporter was liable to complete Part B was rejected. The petitioner failed to generate Part B before transporting goods valued at Rs. 7,62,247 over 800 km, rendering the Part A invalid and non-compliant. The delay of three days in updating Part B was held as a substantial violation, not a minor error. Consequently, the impugned order imposing GST and penalty was affirmed, and the petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
