Assessment time-barred u/s 153 due to missing competent-authority reference for Singapore exchange of information; assessment disallowed as barred by ...
Imported menthol-scented sweet supari classification dispute: seizure quashed, release for home consumption subject to duty bond; bank guarantee refus...
CKD/SKD air-conditioner components classifiable with finished units by essential character; prior advance ruling extended three years, FTA benefits po...
Scope of judicial review under Article 226: supervisory, not appellate; factual reappraisal barred, challenge dismissed; insolvency professional dutie...
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 4819 
Join Channel 
