Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
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.