https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180804 The High Court found in favor of the petitioner in a case involving the forfeiture of a bank guarantee and tax assessment jurisdiction. The Court determined that the tax order was without jurisdiction as the transaction did not fall under Tripura's tax purview. Despite the petitioner's oversight in documentation, the Court deemed the penalties unjust and quashed the orders forfeiting the bank guarantee. Additionally, the Court criticized the assessing officer for not considering crucial aspects and ruled that the tax assessment was unwarranted. Consequently, the tax orders were quashed, and the proceedings were closed, discharging the bank guarantee automatically. en-us Mon, 09 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Apr 2016 10:35:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180804 The High Court found in favor of the petitioner in a case involving the forfeiture of a bank guarantee and tax assessment jurisdiction. The Court determined that the tax order was without jurisdiction as the transaction did not fall under Tripura's tax purview. Despite the petitioner's oversight in documentation, the Court deemed the penalties unjust and quashed the orders forfeiting the bank guarantee. Additionally, the Court criticized the assessing officer for not considering crucial aspects and ruled that the tax assessment was unwarranted. Consequently, the tax orders were quashed, and the proceedings were closed, discharging the bank guarantee automatically. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 09 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180804