Reversal of input tax credit in proportion to exempt supply: specificity of show-cause notice required; order set aside, fresh proceedings allowed wit...
Benami transaction and beneficial ownership: documentary and circumstantial evidence show payors were true beneficiaries, resulting in PBPTA consequen...
After interception of goods in transit, the Court held that the authorities could not bypass the detention and seizure process under section 129 and proceed straight to confiscation under section 130 by issuing Form GST MOV-10. It applied its earlier Gujarat HC decision that sections 129 and 130 operate in distinct fields, and that confiscation under section 130 is relevant only where intention to evade tax is involved. Because proceedings had been initiated under section 129 but were then converted directly into confiscation proceedings, the notice and consequential action were unsustainable and were quashed.
After interception of goods in transit, the Court held that the authorities could not bypass the detention and seizure process under section 129 and proceed straight to confiscation under section 130 by issuing Form GST MOV-10. It applied its earlier Gujarat HC decision that sections 129 and 130 operate in distinct fields, and that confiscation under section 130 is relevant only where intention to evade tax is involved. Because proceedings had been initiated under section 129 but were then converted directly into confiscation proceedings, the notice and consequential action were unsustainable and were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
