Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
HC held that, although the procedural requirements under s.68 and r.138 CGST Rules for movement of goods were ostensibly complied with and the vehicle was no longer in transit, the petitioner's conduct disentitled it to equitable relief under Art. 226. The record established that the petitioner, in collusion with others, had devised a systematic scheme to defraud the revenue by fabricating sham transactions and availing fraudulent input tax credit through bogus entities and fictitious outward liabilities, exploiting systemic gaps in the GST framework. HC declined to interfere with the seizure and detention proceedings, refused the relief of release of goods and conveyance, and dismissed the writ petition with costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to be recovered from the petitioner-company through its Director.
HC held that, although the procedural requirements under s.68 and r.138 CGST Rules for movement of goods were ostensibly complied with and the vehicle was no longer in transit, the petitioner's conduct disentitled it to equitable relief under Art. 226. The record established that the petitioner, in collusion with others, had devised a systematic scheme to defraud the revenue by fabricating sham transactions and availing fraudulent input tax credit through bogus entities and fictitious outward liabilities, exploiting systemic gaps in the GST framework. HC declined to interfere with the seizure and detention proceedings, refused the relief of release of goods and conveyance, and dismissed the writ petition with costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to be recovered from the petitioner-company through its Director.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
