Genuineness of investment evidence determines LTCG entitlement; non specific regulatory reports cannot displace transaction specific documentary proof...
Import entitlement for repairs and after sales service extends to authorised service agents; provisional release allowed subject to bond and quantitat...
Parallel GST adjudication is barred where the same transactions are already the subject of earlier CGST proceedings and the overlap is undisputed. The Court held that, in view of Section 6 of the CGST Act, the State authority was required to verify the common GST portal record and consider the taxpayer's objection to overlapping show cause notices. Because the impugned order ignored that objection despite clear overlap, the State adjudication could not be sustained. The order was quashed, the State notice kept in abeyance, and the CGST authority was directed to complete adjudication before any further State action.
Parallel GST adjudication is barred where the same transactions are already the subject of earlier CGST proceedings and the overlap is undisputed. The Court held that, in view of Section 6 of the CGST Act, the State authority was required to verify the common GST portal record and consider the taxpayer's objection to overlapping show cause notices. Because the impugned order ignored that objection despite clear overlap, the State adjudication could not be sustained. The order was quashed, the State notice kept in abeyance, and the CGST authority was directed to complete adjudication before any further State action.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.