Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
741 to 760 of 95875 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.