ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The HC dismissed the petition challenging action under s.129(3) CGST Act, upholding detention and seizure of goods sent for job work. The court found that at interception there was no requisite delivery challan accompanying the consignment and documentary proof was lacking, although an e-way bill was produced prior to the seizure order. Applying its prior authority, the HC concluded the enforcement action was not illegal or arbitrary where statutory documentation was absent at the time of movement. Consequently the impugned orders were affirmed and no interference was warranted with the revenue authorities' proceedings; the petition is dismissed.
The HC dismissed the petition challenging action under s.129(3) CGST Act, upholding detention and seizure of goods sent for job work. The court found that at interception there was no requisite delivery challan accompanying the consignment and documentary proof was lacking, although an e-way bill was produced prior to the seizure order. Applying its prior authority, the HC concluded the enforcement action was not illegal or arbitrary where statutory documentation was absent at the time of movement. Consequently the impugned orders were affirmed and no interference was warranted with the revenue authorities' proceedings; the petition is dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
