<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (10) TMI 1139 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369173</link>
    <description>HC upheld vehicle detention for e-way bill violation, rejecting appellant&#039;s challenge. Despite withdrawal of Rule 140 challenge, court directed vehicle release upon furnishing bank guarantee and simple bond as per CGST Rules. The decision emphasized strict compliance with tax regulations and procedural requirements for goods detention and release.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jun 2025 11:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539065" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1139 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369173</link>
      <description>HC upheld vehicle detention for e-way bill violation, rejecting appellant&#039;s challenge. Despite withdrawal of Rule 140 challenge, court directed vehicle release upon furnishing bank guarantee and simple bond as per CGST Rules. The decision emphasized strict compliance with tax regulations and procedural requirements for goods detention and release.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369173</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>