Detention order - claim of ownership - the concerned authority ...

GST

August 27, 2019

Detention order - claim of ownership - the concerned authority will have to consider the applicability of sub-section (1) of Section 129 and if prayed to that effect, whether the appellant is entitled to the benefit of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 129 of the said Act of 2017.

View Source

← Previous Next →

Detention order - claim of ownership - the concerned authority ...

GST

August 27, 2019

You may also like:

Detaining authority is under obligation to comply with the requirements by formulating grounds for detention - HC

Refund of excess amount lying to the credit of electronic cash ledger of the petitioner - applicability of proviso to sub-section (1) of Section 54 or sub-section (1) of...

Addition u/s 40A(2)(b) - payment sub-contractors who are the relative of the partners - the authority had rightly disallowed the expenditure so claimed by the assessee - HC

Dishonor of Detention Certificate - seeking permission for clearance of goods without payment of demurrage and container detention charges in terms of Regulation 6 (1)...

Benefit of exemption subject to the condition that no Cenvat Credit is availed - The appellant are eligible for exemption under Notification No. 30/2004-C.E. when they...

Claim of exemption u/s 54F – amount advanced to his wife towards purchase of the property - assessee has 50% ownership over the property - exemption allowed - AT

In respect of a co-ownership property leased to the partnership firm cannot be claimed as self-occupied property merely because partner is occupying the same

Detention order - Smuggling - Gold - currency - Baggage Rules - the order of preventive detention is a preventive measure and that predicated on the admissible voluntary...

Bail application - Service of detention order - section 3(3) of COFEPOSA Act, 1974 - Detaining authority was aware of the requirement of serving orders of detention and...

Detention of goods - demurrage/detention charges - This is an unfortunate case where the respondents/Customs authorities intentionally appeared to have omitted issuing...

Quick Updates: