Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the 200% penalty levied under s.129 CGST/WBGST was unwarranted and ordering the appellate and original orders set aside. The court found no evidence of mens rea to evade tax, accepted the appellants' undisputed plea of traffic-induced delay and applied the statutory 8-hour extension available to transporter/owner/supplier, leaving only a residual delay which revenue failed to characterise as mala fide. In consequence the HC directed the appropriate departmental authority to refund the penalty already recovered upon receipt of an application by the appellants within eight weeks. The imposition of penalty in a mechanical manner was declared unjustified.
The HC allowed the petition, holding that the 200% penalty levied under s.129 CGST/WBGST was unwarranted and ordering the appellate and original orders set aside. The court found no evidence of mens rea to evade tax, accepted the appellants' undisputed plea of traffic-induced delay and applied the statutory 8-hour extension available to transporter/owner/supplier, leaving only a residual delay which revenue failed to characterise as mala fide. In consequence the HC directed the appropriate departmental authority to refund the penalty already recovered upon receipt of an application by the appellants within eight weeks. The imposition of penalty in a mechanical manner was declared unjustified.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.