Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Import entitlement for repairs and after sales service extends to authorised service agents; provisional release allowed subject to bond and quantitat...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
6101 to 6120 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Detention and penalty proceedings under s.129 of the CGST/GGST Act were challenged on the ground that the adjudication order under s.129(3) was issued beyond the statutory seven-day limit from service of notice. Since the notice in Form GST MOV-07 was served on 10.11.2025 and the order in Form GST MOV-09 was passed on 19.11.2025, the authority acted in breach of s.129(3), rendering the order without legal validity; consequently, the detention order in Form GST MOV-06, the notice in Form GST MOV-07, and the order in Form GST MOV-09 were quashed, and the petition was allowed. - HC
Detention and penalty proceedings under s.129 of the CGST/GGST Act were challenged on the ground that the adjudication order under s.129(3) was issued beyond the statutory seven-day limit from service of notice. Since the notice in Form GST MOV-07 was served on 10.11.2025 and the order in Form GST MOV-09 was passed on 19.11.2025, the authority acted in breach of s.129(3), rendering the order without legal validity; consequently, the detention order in Form GST MOV-06, the notice in Form GST MOV-07, and the order in Form GST MOV-09 were quashed, and the petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.