Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
9201 to 9220 of 96365 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 allowed the petition and set aside the impugned orders under section 129 of the CGST Act. The court found the transaction to be a bona fide bill-to-ship movement from Maharashtra to Uttar Pradesh, supported by tax invoice, e-way bill and GR, and recognized by the State and its circular. Seizure solely on account of an expired e-way bill did not establish mens rea to evade tax; the delay resulted from the driver's illness and no adverse material showed intent to evade. In absence of requisite culpable mental element, penalty and seizure proceedings were unsustainable and were quashed.
The HC allowed the petition and set aside the impugned orders under section 129 of the CGST Act. The court found the transaction to be a bona fide bill-to-ship movement from Maharashtra to Uttar Pradesh, supported by tax invoice, e-way bill and GR, and recognized by the State and its circular. Seizure solely on account of an expired e-way bill did not establish mens rea to evade tax; the delay resulted from the driver's illness and no adverse material showed intent to evade. In absence of requisite culpable mental element, penalty and seizure proceedings were unsustainable and were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
