Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
A writ petition challenging detention and penalty under s.129(1)(a) and s.129(1)(b) of the GST Act was held not maintainable due to an efficacious statutory appeal under s.107, as the case did not fall within recognised exceptions to the alternate-remedy rule; disputed facts regarding alleged denial of personal hearing could not be satisfactorily resolved on affidavits, and the action was not shown to be wholly without jurisdiction, despite reliance on the hearing requirement for GST MOV-9. Consequently, the petitioner was relegated to appeal, with a direction for expeditious disposal if filed promptly. To prevent spoilage of perishable goods, release of goods and conveyance was ordered upon payment of penalty under s.129(1)(a) and furnishing a bank guarantee securing the balance under s.129(1)(b). - HC
A writ petition challenging detention and penalty under s.129(1)(a) and s.129(1)(b) of the GST Act was held not maintainable due to an efficacious statutory appeal under s.107, as the case did not fall within recognised exceptions to the alternate-remedy rule; disputed facts regarding alleged denial of personal hearing could not be satisfactorily resolved on affidavits, and the action was not shown to be wholly without jurisdiction, despite reliance on the hearing requirement for GST MOV-9. Consequently, the petitioner was relegated to appeal, with a direction for expeditious disposal if filed promptly. To prevent spoilage of perishable goods, release of goods and conveyance was ordered upon payment of penalty under s.129(1)(a) and furnishing a bank guarantee securing the balance under s.129(1)(b). - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.