Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Page of 4796
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
301 to 320 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 dismissed the petition challenging the levy of penalty under section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, for violation of Rule 138 of the GST Rules, 2017. The petitioner's claim of no intent to evade tax was rejected due to discrepancies between the declared E-Way Bill loading point and the actual GPS-verified loading location. The vehicle's prolonged stay at Rupnarayanpur confirmed the goods were loaded contrary to the declared dispatch place. Although the petitioner paid the penalty and secured release of goods without protest, this did not constitute waiver of rights. The court found the adjudicating authority's material against the petitioner sufficient and held the petition as meritless and an afterthought, dismissing it in limine.
The HC dismissed the petition challenging the levy of penalty under section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017, for violation of Rule 138 of the GST Rules, 2017. The petitioner's claim of no intent to evade tax was rejected due to discrepancies between the declared E-Way Bill loading point and the actual GPS-verified loading location. The vehicle's prolonged stay at Rupnarayanpur confirmed the goods were loaded contrary to the declared dispatch place. Although the petitioner paid the penalty and secured release of goods without protest, this did not constitute waiver of rights. The court found the adjudicating authority's material against the petitioner sufficient and held the petition as meritless and an afterthought, dismissing it in limine.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
