Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2025 (6) TMI 1421

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the supply of Dry Grapes. The conveyance bearing No.KA-28-C-9782 carrying Dry Grapes from Vijayapur to Coimbatore (TN) was intercepted by the second respondent on 04.07.2021 at Vanagiri Toll Plaza, Kustagi, Karnataka. The person in charge of the conveyance tendered the Tax Invoice and E-way Bill. On verification of the tendered documents, the Commercial Taxes Department suspected the movement of Copra from Vijayapura to Coimbatore. The Tax Department obtained a statement from the person in charge of the goods vehicle on 04.07.2021 in the Form GST MOV-01 and recorded the statement in a separate sheet. The physical verification was conducted on 05.07.2021 in the presence of a person in charge of the conveyance, by mentioning the descripti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d on the supply of goods and services. In the present case, the conveyance was intercepted on the Fourth day of July 2021, and upon verification of the tendered documents by the person in charge, the authorities suspected the movement of the goods, i.e., Copra from Vijayapura to Coimbatore. However, on verification, it was found that there were no Copras in the vehicle. The petitioner strongly objected to the illegal action of the tax authorities. It is urged on behalf of the petitioner that there was a typographical error, and there was no intent to evade any amount of tax. On the other hand, the Government specifically contended that there is a mismatch of the goods and that the petitioner has intentionally evaded the tax liability, and ....