Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
The HC quashed the impugned orders imposing penalty under s.129(3) of the GST Act and allowed the petition. The court found the record established non-generation of Part B of the e-way bill due to a technical error, which was not disputed, and no authority had recorded any finding of mens rea to evade tax. Absent any proven intent to evade payment of tax, the statutory prerequisite for levy of the s.129(3) penalty was not satisfied. In consequence, the penalty and consequential orders were set aside and the petitioner's challenge succeeded.
The HC quashed the impugned orders imposing penalty under s.129(3) of the GST Act and allowed the petition. The court found the record established non-generation of Part B of the e-way bill due to a technical error, which was not disputed, and no authority had recorded any finding of mens rea to evade tax. Absent any proven intent to evade payment of tax, the statutory prerequisite for levy of the s.129(3) penalty was not satisfied. In consequence, the penalty and consequential orders were set aside and the petitioner's challenge succeeded.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
