https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355242 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging the seizure of goods under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It was held that since the goods were in transit from outside the State, the transaction should be governed by the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (I.G.S.T.) along with Central G.S.T., making the provisions of U.P.G.S.T. inapplicable. The court directed the release of the seized goods, considering their perishable nature, upon the petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond and security for the proposed tax and penalty, with the respondent given two weeks to provide instructions and file a counter affidavit. en-us Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Feb 2018 07:24:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355242 The court ruled in favor of the petitioner in a case challenging the seizure of goods under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It was held that since the goods were in transit from outside the State, the transaction should be governed by the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (I.G.S.T.) along with Central G.S.T., making the provisions of U.P.G.S.T. inapplicable. The court directed the release of the seized goods, considering their perishable nature, upon the petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond and security for the proposed tax and penalty, with the respondent given two weeks to provide instructions and file a counter affidavit. Case-Laws GST Thu, 01 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355242