ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The HC held that detention and seizure under section 129 of the GST Act was unwarranted where goods were accompanied by genuine import documents and an e-way bill subsequently produced before the seizure order; the record showed the vehicle and goods transported from one State to another and no dispute as to quality, quantity or weight. The court found no mens rea to evade tax arising merely from a change in place of destination or from a technical glitch in generating the e-way bill. Consequently, the impugned orders issued by the respondents were quashed and the petition was allowed.
The HC held that detention and seizure under section 129 of the GST Act was unwarranted where goods were accompanied by genuine import documents and an e-way bill subsequently produced before the seizure order; the record showed the vehicle and goods transported from one State to another and no dispute as to quality, quantity or weight. The court found no mens rea to evade tax arising merely from a change in place of destination or from a technical glitch in generating the e-way bill. Consequently, the impugned orders issued by the respondents were quashed and the petition was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.