Search Results for "arecanut transportation"

6 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 6 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Detention of Goods Under GST for Lack of Jurisdiction — Second Detention Without Proper Authorization Invalid. The court held that detention of goods under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 requires proper authorization and cannot be done without jurisdiction.

The petitioner, a transporter registered under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act) and Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Quashes Show Cause Notice in GST Case for Lack of Jurisdiction and Violation of Natural Justice. Show Cause Notice Issued by Additional Commissioner Without Proper Authorization and Without Providing Relevant Documents Set Aside.

The petitioner, M/s. Vigneshwara Transport Company, a proprietor engaged in transportation of goods and registered under the Central Goods and Service...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Jurisdiction of State Tax Officer Under IGST; Confiscation of Arecanut Goods Upheld. Court Holds that Section 4 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 Does Not Require Separate Notification for Cross-Empowerment of State Officers.

The petitioner, a proprietorship concern dealing in arecanut, challenged a series of orders passed by the Commercial Tax Officer (Enforcement) under t...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Karnataka High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Jurisdiction in GST Confiscation Case. Commercial Tax Officer Holds Proper Officer Status Under IGST Act Due to Cross Empowerment; Notification Only Required for Exceptions.

The petitioner, a proprietorship concern engaged in trading arecanut, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India ch...