https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781203 The HC dismissed the petition, holding that proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act were improperly invoked after a survey that disclosed excess/unaccounted stock. Section 35(6) mandates that where a registered person fails to account for goods, the Proper Officer must determine tax under sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis. The court followed existing authority that s.130 is not the correct remedy for discovery of excess stock during survey and therefore declined to interfere with the impugned orders. en-us Mon, 10 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781203 The HC dismissed the petition, holding that proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act were improperly invoked after a survey that disclosed excess/unaccounted stock. Section 35(6) mandates that where a registered person fails to account for goods, the Proper Officer must determine tax under sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis. The court followed existing authority that s.130 is not the correct remedy for discovery of excess stock during survey and therefore declined to interfere with the impugned orders. Case-Laws GST Mon, 10 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781203