Transfer pricing comparables selection and working capital adjustment u/r 10B(1)(e)(iii), remanded for recomputation with rejected comparables include...
Proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act were initiated solely because the e-way bill reflected an incorrect PIN code for the "ship to" location, though the consignee details and destination (Samastipur, Bihar) were otherwise correctly stated and the goods were accompanied by requisite documents including tax invoice, e-way bill and GR. Applying the legal position that a mere PIN code error, when the consignor/consignee address is otherwise correct, does not justify detention proceedings under Section 129, the impugned detention and penalty orders were held unsustainable and were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act were initiated solely because the e-way bill reflected an incorrect PIN code for the "ship to" location, though the consignee details and destination (Samastipur, Bihar) were otherwise correctly stated and the goods were accompanied by requisite documents including tax invoice, e-way bill and GR. Applying the legal position that a mere PIN code error, when the consignor/consignee address is otherwise correct, does not justify detention proceedings under Section 129, the impugned detention and penalty orders were held unsustainable and were quashed, and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
