Tariff classification determines GST schedule and rate; beverages in Schedule III attract the higher rate, tea extracts and syrups in Schedule I attra...
Fraudulent trading requires cogent evidence of intent to defraud; ordinary-course payments protected, except post-insolvency withdrawals must be resto...
Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Parallel tax enforcement on the same subject-matter was held impermissible where the Central Tax Authority had already proceeded against alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit for the same period. Applying the rule against overlapping coercive action, the Court found the State Tax Authority's provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts unwarranted, arbitrary, and lacking lawful foundation, and quashed the attachment while permitting operation of the accounts. The Court also clarified that independent investigation against suppliers could continue in accordance with law, but it could not justify continued restraint on the petitioner's business or bank accounts.
Parallel tax enforcement on the same subject-matter was held impermissible where the Central Tax Authority had already proceeded against alleged fraudulent availment of input tax credit for the same period. Applying the rule against overlapping coercive action, the Court found the State Tax Authority's provisional attachment of the petitioner's bank accounts unwarranted, arbitrary, and lacking lawful foundation, and quashed the attachment while permitting operation of the accounts. The Court also clarified that independent investigation against suppliers could continue in accordance with law, but it could not justify continued restraint on the petitioner's business or bank accounts.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
