https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341163 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the release of detained goods upon providing a bank guarantee for the tax amount. The court emphasized that personal imports for personal use, not involving sales within the state, do not attract tax liability. It held that the first respondent, lacking authority as the Assessing Authority, could not impose tax and penalty based on non-disclosure of previous imports. The Assessing Authority was instructed to handle the matter within four weeks, highlighting the procedural error in the first respondent's actions. en-us Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Apr 2017 09:56:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341163 The High Court ruled in favor of the petitioner, directing the release of detained goods upon providing a bank guarantee for the tax amount. The court emphasized that personal imports for personal use, not involving sales within the state, do not attract tax liability. It held that the first respondent, lacking authority as the Assessing Authority, could not impose tax and penalty based on non-disclosure of previous imports. The Assessing Authority was instructed to handle the matter within four weeks, highlighting the procedural error in the first respondent's actions. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 23 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341163