Misdeclaration of quantity rejected where supplier evidence established counting errors, so reassessment, confiscation and redemption fine were set as...
Admissibility of electronic evidence controls valuation and penalty exposure; non compliant e records and statements nullify revaluation and penalties...
Whether the issuing authority had jurisdiction to serve the impugned show-cause notice under s.74 CGST/MGST, given paragraph 2 of Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) was declared ultra vires; court applied principles from the Supreme Court's Kusum Ingots decision on pan-India applicability to frame this as the primary jurisdictional issue - respondents ordered to file a reply affidavit within two weeks addressing whether respondent-authority possessed jurisdiction to issue the SCN, with matter listed for further hearing on the stated date. - HC
Whether the issuing authority had jurisdiction to serve the impugned show-cause notice under s.74 CGST/MGST, given paragraph 2 of Notification No.11/2017-Central Tax (Rate) was declared ultra vires; court applied principles from the Supreme Court's Kusum Ingots decision on pan-India applicability to frame this as the primary jurisdictional issue - respondents ordered to file a reply affidavit within two weeks addressing whether respondent-authority possessed jurisdiction to issue the SCN, with matter listed for further hearing on the stated date. - HC
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
