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...
Straight-line lease rental accounting change results in penalty quashed where disclosed accounts and bona fide arguable accounting interpretation exis...
Where CGST authorities have already initiated proceedings on a given subject matter, the State GST authorities lack jurisdiction to commence parallel/dual proceedings on the same subject matter, being barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Applying this statutory bar and the binding principle that only the originally seized GST authority can proceed further in accordance with law, the subsequent State-initiated show-cause notice and adjudication actions were held not maintainable. Consequently, the impugned State show-cause notice, order-in-original, adjudication order, and summary orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Where CGST authorities have already initiated proceedings on a given subject matter, the State GST authorities lack jurisdiction to commence parallel/dual proceedings on the same subject matter, being barred by Section 6(2)(b) of the CGST Act. Applying this statutory bar and the binding principle that only the originally seized GST authority can proceed further in accordance with law, the subsequent State-initiated show-cause notice and adjudication actions were held not maintainable. Consequently, the impugned State show-cause notice, order-in-original, adjudication order, and summary orders were quashed and the writ petition was allowed. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.