Transaction value rejection requires reliable corroboration; refundable VAT is excluded and temporary registration does not defeat new-vehicle exempti...
Appellate jurisdiction remains available where a wrist-worn gold ornament cannot conclusively be characterised as imported baggage at the preliminary ...
Written complaint requirement bars cognizance on police reports for securities offences, while unsupported breach of trust and cheating allegations fa...
Risk-based postal import clearance standardises electronic assessment, document requests, duty realisation and delivery controls at Foreign Post Offic...
Customs Cargo Service Provider appointment extends custodianship to additional terminal land, subject to cargo-control, security and licence condition...
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders, holding the assessing authorities exceeded jurisdiction in initiating proceedings under Section 73. On review of original records the court found the petitioner to be a work-contractor awarded contracts by a state agency for the relevant assessment years, and that payments were effected after GST implementation; however, that temporal change did not confer jurisdiction on GST authorities to levy tax, interest or penalty for pre-GST transactions merely on a GSTR-3B/Form-26AS mismatch. The HC held the proper course was notification to the pre-GST assessing authority under the applicable indirect tax law, not initiation of Section 73 proceedings under the GST regime.
The HC allowed the petition and quashed the impugned orders, holding the assessing authorities exceeded jurisdiction in initiating proceedings under Section 73. On review of original records the court found the petitioner to be a work-contractor awarded contracts by a state agency for the relevant assessment years, and that payments were effected after GST implementation; however, that temporal change did not confer jurisdiction on GST authorities to levy tax, interest or penalty for pre-GST transactions merely on a GSTR-3B/Form-26AS mismatch. The HC held the proper course was notification to the pre-GST assessing authority under the applicable indirect tax law, not initiation of Section 73 proceedings under the GST regime.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
