https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367681 Officers appointed under the State GST law may act as proper officers for IGST purposes when they are already authorised under the State enactment, and the absence of a separate notification under Section 4 does not by itself defeat their competence. The article also notes that where a final tax and penalty order carries an express statutory appeal, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to bypass that remedy. On that basis, the seizure and connected proceedings were not quashed, and the taxpayer was left to pursue the appellate route. en-us Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jul 2026 13:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367681 Officers appointed under the State GST law may act as proper officers for IGST purposes when they are already authorised under the State enactment, and the absence of a separate notification under Section 4 does not by itself defeat their competence. The article also notes that where a final tax and penalty order carries an express statutory appeal, writ jurisdiction should ordinarily not be used to bypass that remedy. On that basis, the seizure and connected proceedings were not quashed, and the taxpayer was left to pursue the appellate route. Case-Laws GST Thu, 23 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367681