Retroactive interim-moratorium exclusion permits protective asset disclosure and preservation measures against personal guarantors pending arbitration...
Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Perishable goods detained in transit were ordered to be released to the petitioner because the demand order disclosed no concrete or prima facie material negating the petitioner's ownership of the consignment. The Court held that release had to follow compliance with the statutory payment required from the owner under Section 129(1)(a) of the GST law, and that the revenue could not withhold release merely on a disputed ownership basis. It also clarified that, if the petitioner did not pursue the statutory appeal and the demand attained finality, the revenue remained free to proceed in accordance with law.
Perishable goods detained in transit were ordered to be released to the petitioner because the demand order disclosed no concrete or prima facie material negating the petitioner's ownership of the consignment. The Court held that release had to follow compliance with the statutory payment required from the owner under Section 129(1)(a) of the GST law, and that the revenue could not withhold release merely on a disputed ownership basis. It also clarified that, if the petitioner did not pursue the statutory appeal and the demand attained finality, the revenue remained free to proceed in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
