Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
621 to 640 of 96047 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 seizure order and related proceedings. The court found the E-way bill accompanied the conveyance and, although the delivery challan was not initially produced at interception, it was furnished prior to the seizure order and accepted by the first appellate authority as lawfully issued under the GST regime. No finding of tax evasion was recorded against the petitioner, and ownership of the excavator by the petitioner was undisputed. Because the statutory documents were validly issued and no evasion was shown, the impugned action was held vitiated and was set aside, with the petition accordingly allowed.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the seizure order and related proceedings. The court found the E-way bill accompanied the conveyance and, although the delivery challan was not initially produced at interception, it was furnished prior to the seizure order and accepted by the first appellate authority as lawfully issued under the GST regime. No finding of tax evasion was recorded against the petitioner, and ownership of the excavator by the petitioner was undisputed. Because the statutory documents were validly issued and no evasion was shown, the impugned action was held vitiated and was set aside, with the petition accordingly allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.