Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
221 to 240 of 95875 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 allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders...
Petition allowed; orders quashed where detention and seizure based on misclassification and speculative undervaluation cannot sustain penalty under Section 129
Contents
Summary
Note
Bookmark
Share
✓ Copied successfully !
Print
Print Options
For full text, please login
Login to TaxTMI
Verification Pending
The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders dated 4.1.2025 and 22.5.2024, holding that detention and seizure based solely on alleged misclassification and speculative undervaluation cannot sustain a penalty under Section 129 of the UP GST Act where consignment documents were in order. The court found no discrepancy in quality or quantity and noted that the e-tax invoice, e-way bill and bill of lading/accompanying transport document accompanied the goods at detention. Relying on controlling HC authority precluding penalties premised on conjectural undervaluation, the tribunal's orders imposing penalty were set aside and the petition granted.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders dated 4.1.2025 and 22.5.2024, holding that detention and seizure based solely on alleged misclassification and speculative undervaluation cannot sustain a penalty under Section 129 of the UP GST Act where consignment documents were in order. The court found no discrepancy in quality or quantity and noted that the e-tax invoice, e-way bill and bill of lading/accompanying transport document accompanied the goods at detention. Relying on controlling HC authority precluding penalties premised on conjectural undervaluation, the tribunal's orders imposing penalty were set aside and the petition granted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4794
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
