Retrospective cancellation of charitable registration under section 12AB(4) was unsustainable; related-party benefit allegations did not prove nongenu...
Merger control notice and disclosure rules: Supreme Court limits penalties, rejects reopening of approved combination, and sets aside adverse findings...
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order of the respondent authorities dated 9 August 2025, holding that the detained goods and vehicle must be released under Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act read with the IGST Act, on the invoice value of the goods. The court found no basis to disturb the petitioner's entitlement to release and directed the respondent authorities to undertake the valuation and release exercise in accordance with Section 129(1)(a) within three weeks. The writ petition challenging detention was accordingly allowed, and the administrative detention order set aside.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order of the respondent authorities dated 9 August 2025, holding that the detained goods and vehicle must be released under Section 129(1)(a) of the CGST Act read with the IGST Act, on the invoice value of the goods. The court found no basis to disturb the petitioner's entitlement to release and directed the respondent authorities to undertake the valuation and release exercise in accordance with Section 129(1)(a) within three weeks. The writ petition challenging detention was accordingly allowed, and the administrative detention order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4823 
Join Channel 
