https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234717 Under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008, proceedings for release of detained goods on security are distinct from the legality of the seizure order itself. The court noted that the appeal and revision provisions linked to the security direction did not confer jurisdiction on the Commissioner, Tribunal, or revisional court to examine the seizure's validity, so that challenge was not maintainable in those proceedings. It also found no error in directing security equal to twice the tax imposable, as the quantum lay within judicial discretion and raised no substantial question of law. The revision therefore failed, while leaving the party free to challenge the seizure before the appropriate forum. en-us Mon, 02 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Sep 2014 12:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234717 Under the U.P. Value Added Tax Act, 2008, proceedings for release of detained goods on security are distinct from the legality of the seizure order itself. The court noted that the appeal and revision provisions linked to the security direction did not confer jurisdiction on the Commissioner, Tribunal, or revisional court to examine the seizure's validity, so that challenge was not maintainable in those proceedings. It also found no error in directing security equal to twice the tax imposable, as the quantum lay within judicial discretion and raised no substantial question of law. The revision therefore failed, while leaving the party free to challenge the seizure before the appropriate forum. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 02 May 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=234717