Classification of imported salvaged shaft pieces as ship parts confirmed, reassessment time-barred and appeal allowed restoring original classificatio...
Scope of intermediary status for data hosting services: tribunal finds provider not intermediary, services exported and not taxable, limited remand on...
CENVAT credit availability after omission of Rule 12B in textiles confirmed; late addendum to SCN introducing new grounds held time-barred and invalid...
Export of Wheat Flour and related products subject to online allocation, eligibility criteria, non-transferable six-month authorisations and reporting...
Page of 4821
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
7081 to 7100 of 96408 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Writ jurisdiction was invoked to challenge detention/seizure proceedings on the plea that the goods were released on lesser security under s.129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, that invoices could not be doubted without any survey, and that the show cause notice having been issued in the driver's name could not prejudice the supplier. The Court held that reliance on alleged "consistency" with other writ orders is misplaced because writ relief is discretionary and fact-sensitive, and even minor factual differences justify different outcomes. As the petitioner had an efficacious statutory appeal and the contentions involved disputed factual issues (including service and non-response to the notice), writ interference was refused and the petition was dismissed - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.