Limitation in customs appeals permits exclusion for bona fide refund proceedings, enabling restoration of Bill of Entry assessment challenges on merit...
Warehousing permission requires deposit at the designated bonded warehouse; unauthorised diversion triggers confiscation, redemption fine and importer...
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the impugned orders instituting proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act against the respondent. Relying on statutory obligations under section 35 and sub-section (6) thereof, the Court affirmed that where a survey reveals unaccounted goods the Proper Officer may determine tax liability and invoke provisions of sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis; the Court considered but distinguished prior authorities addressing use of section 130 for excess stock and concluded there was no jurisdictional infirmity or ground to interfere with the initiation of proceedings. Petition accordingly dismissed.
The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the impugned orders instituting proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act against the respondent. Relying on statutory obligations under section 35 and sub-section (6) thereof, the Court affirmed that where a survey reveals unaccounted goods the Proper Officer may determine tax liability and invoke provisions of sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis; the Court considered but distinguished prior authorities addressing use of section 130 for excess stock and concluded there was no jurisdictional infirmity or ground to interfere with the initiation of proceedings. Petition accordingly dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
