https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332611 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, finding that the goods' movement from Pulichappallam to Puducherry did not constitute an interstate transaction as claimed by the respondents. The court held that the reasons for detention provided by the first respondent were invalid, setting aside the impugned order and directing the release of the consignments without delay. The judgment underscored the significance of accurately determining jurisdiction and complying with proper documentation for inter-state goods movement. en-us Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:07:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332611 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner, finding that the goods' movement from Pulichappallam to Puducherry did not constitute an interstate transaction as claimed by the respondents. The court held that the reasons for detention provided by the first respondent were invalid, setting aside the impugned order and directing the release of the consignments without delay. The judgment underscored the significance of accurately determining jurisdiction and complying with proper documentation for inter-state goods movement. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 12 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=332611