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...
Challenge to the legality of Central and State notifications extending time under Section 73(10) CGST/RGST was addressed by permitting an interim procedural remedy: the petitioner may file a statutory appeal against assessment orders within four weeks. The Court exercised discretion to grant this limited time as an accommodation without prejudicing the pending substantive challenge to the Notifications before the Supreme Court. The appellate proceedings are expressly made subject to the ultimate determination on the Notifications' validity, and applications for condonation of delay and exemption of filings were allowed.
Challenge to the legality of Central and State notifications extending time under Section 73(10) CGST/RGST was addressed by permitting an interim procedural remedy: the petitioner may file a statutory appeal against assessment orders within four weeks. The Court exercised discretion to grant this limited time as an accommodation without prejudicing the pending substantive challenge to the Notifications before the Supreme Court. The appellate proceedings are expressly made subject to the ultimate determination on the Notifications' validity, and applications for condonation of delay and exemption of filings were allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.