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...
Expiry of statutory limitation for challenging a GST order was decisive where the petitioner failed to substantiate lawful availment of input tax credit and did not refute reliance on invoices from a supplier alleged to issue fake invoices; consequence: the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. The adjudicating authority is directed to decide on merits subject to a protective condition requiring the taxpayer to deposit 25% of the disputed tax from its electronic cash register within thirty days, balancing revenue protection with the taxpayers opportunity for merits adjudication.
Expiry of statutory limitation for challenging a GST order was decisive where the petitioner failed to substantiate lawful availment of input tax credit and did not refute reliance on invoices from a supplier alleged to issue fake invoices; consequence: the matter was remitted for fresh adjudication. The adjudicating authority is directed to decide on merits subject to a protective condition requiring the taxpayer to deposit 25% of the disputed tax from its electronic cash register within thirty days, balancing revenue protection with the taxpayers opportunity for merits adjudication.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
