<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Petition dismissed; proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 and Section 35(6) upheld for unaccounted goods</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94108</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the impugned orders instituting proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act against the respondent. Relying on statutory obligations under section 35 and sub-section (6) thereof, the Court affirmed that where a survey reveals unaccounted goods the Proper Officer may determine tax liability and invoke provisions of sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis; the Court considered but distinguished prior authorities addressing use of section 130 for excess stock and concluded there was no jurisdictional infirmity or ground to interfere with the initiation of proceedings. Petition accordingly dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=863979" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Petition dismissed; proceedings under Section 130 read with Section 122 and Section 35(6) upheld for unaccounted goods</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94108</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the petition and upheld the impugned orders instituting proceedings under section 130 read with section 122 of the GST Act against the respondent. Relying on statutory obligations under section 35 and sub-section (6) thereof, the Court affirmed that where a survey reveals unaccounted goods the Proper Officer may determine tax liability and invoke provisions of sections 73/74 mutatis mutandis; the Court considered but distinguished prior authorities addressing use of section 130 for excess stock and concluded there was no jurisdictional infirmity or ground to interfere with the initiation of proceedings. Petition accordingly dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2025 08:17:49 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>