Purposive interpretation of residential house exemption: unregistered purchase agreement alone does not defeat relief, but investment must be verified...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3041 to 3060 of 96333 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 quashed proceedings initiated under s.130 read with s.122 of the GST Act against the petitioner, holding that survey-discovered excess stock must be addressed under the statutory machinery of s.73/74 and not by invoking s.130. The court emphasized that the GST Act is a self-contained code prescribing specific procedures where goods are unrecorded in books, obliging the proper officer to proceed under s.73/74. Reliance on prior higher-court rulings confirming that s.130 is inapplicable to excess stock found during survey reinforced the conclusion. Consequently, the impugned orders based on s.130/ s.122 were held unsustainable and were quashed; the petition was allowed.
The HC quashed proceedings initiated under s.130 read with s.122 of the GST Act against the petitioner, holding that survey-discovered excess stock must be addressed under the statutory machinery of s.73/74 and not by invoking s.130. The court emphasized that the GST Act is a self-contained code prescribing specific procedures where goods are unrecorded in books, obliging the proper officer to proceed under s.73/74. Reliance on prior higher-court rulings confirming that s.130 is inapplicable to excess stock found during survey reinforced the conclusion. Consequently, the impugned orders based on s.130/ s.122 were held unsustainable and were quashed; the petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
