06 (2) (a)

Fastenex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State Tax Officer (Inspection-VI) – Madras High Court

  Start Free Trial β†— Already have an account or subscription? Log in below to continue. Login Access Default, Dispute, and Debt Resolution Laws Password Email OTP WhatsApp OTP Google Username or Email Password πŸ‘ Remember this device Log In Forgot Password? Email Send OTP Enter OTP Verify & Login Resend OTP Remember this device

Fastenex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State Tax Officer (Inspection-VI) – Madras High Court Read Post Β»

Mohammed Kamran Vs. Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence and Ors. – Karnataka High Court

  Start Free Trial β†— Already have an account or subscription? Log in below to continue. Login Access Default, Dispute, and Debt Resolution Laws Password Email OTP WhatsApp OTP Google Username or Email Password πŸ‘ Remember this device Log In Forgot Password? Email Send OTP Enter OTP Verify & Login Resend OTP Remember this device

Mohammed Kamran Vs. Senior Intelligence Officer, Directorate General of Goods and Service Tax Intelligence and Ors. – Karnataka High Court Read Post Β»

State GST officers cannot invoke Sections 129 and 130 of the IGST regime to detain or confiscate goods in transit where the inter-State movement originates outside Andhra Pradesh and culminates outside Andhra Pradesh, and undervaluation or valuation disputes do not by themselves justify such seizure or confiscation – Golden Traders and Ors. Vs. Deputy Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Anr. – Andhra Pradesh High Court

  Start Free Trial β†— Already have an account or subscription? Log in below to continue. Login Access Default, Dispute, and Debt Resolution Laws Password Email OTP WhatsApp OTP Google Username or Email Password πŸ‘ Remember this device Log In Forgot Password? Email Send OTP Enter OTP Verify & Login Resend OTP Remember this device

State GST officers cannot invoke Sections 129 and 130 of the IGST regime to detain or confiscate goods in transit where the inter-State movement originates outside Andhra Pradesh and culminates outside Andhra Pradesh, and undervaluation or valuation disputes do not by themselves justify such seizure or confiscation – Golden Traders and Ors. Vs. Deputy Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Anr. – Andhra Pradesh High Court Read Post Β»

Armour Security (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi East Commissionerate and Anr. – Supreme Court

  Start Free Trial β†— Already have an account or subscription? Log in below to continue. Login Access Default, Dispute, and Debt Resolution Laws Password Email OTP WhatsApp OTP Google Username or Email Password πŸ‘ Remember this device Log In Forgot Password? Email Send OTP Enter OTP Verify & Login Resend OTP Remember this device

Armour Security (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, CGST, Delhi East Commissionerate and Anr. – Supreme Court Read Post Β»

Scroll to Top