Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Digital accessibility audit and remediation deadlines extended, while all other disability-compliance obligations for regulated entities remain unchan...
Where exported goods are zero rated and no tax is payable, a procedural contravention of Rule 138 (expiry of an E-way bill) without evidence of intent to evade tax does not support computation or imposition of penalty under Section 129(1)(a). Applying Coordinate Bench reasoning, the expiry caused by a vehicular breakdown shortly before interception was a transport mishap and not a tax-evasion device; therefore harsh penal consequences under Section 129(3) were unsustainable. The impugned APL 04 orders were quashed and the penal amount was directed to be refunded with interest within twelve weeks.
Where exported goods are zero rated and no tax is payable, a procedural contravention of Rule 138 (expiry of an E-way bill) without evidence of intent to evade tax does not support computation or imposition of penalty under Section 129(1)(a). Applying Coordinate Bench reasoning, the expiry caused by a vehicular breakdown shortly before interception was a transport mishap and not a tax-evasion device; therefore harsh penal consequences under Section 129(3) were unsustainable. The impugned APL 04 orders were quashed and the penal amount was directed to be refunded with interest within twelve weeks.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.