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...
GST proceedings on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting minerals were not finally adjudicated on merits because the levy issue is pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court found the facts to be almost identical to an earlier case and disposed of the writ petitions on the same terms, directing that the impugned proceedings remain in abeyance and that the respondent proceed in accordance with law after the Supreme Court decision. The Court therefore declined to examine the substantive GST demand at this stage and applied the earlier identical order.
GST proceedings on seigniorage fee/royalty for quarrying and transporting minerals were not finally adjudicated on merits because the levy issue is pending before the Supreme Court. The High Court found the facts to be almost identical to an earlier case and disposed of the writ petitions on the same terms, directing that the impugned proceedings remain in abeyance and that the respondent proceed in accordance with law after the Supreme Court decision. The Court therefore declined to examine the substantive GST demand at this stage and applied the earlier identical order.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
