<?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 1237 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369271</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the seizure order and show cause notice issued under the UPGST Act, 2017. The court emphasized the petitioner&#039;s compliance efforts, timely submission of the E-way bill, and the genuine nature of the transaction. It ruled in favor of the petitioner, highlighting the significance of considering taxpayer compliance and the timing of regulatory changes in tax laws when assessing penalties and seizures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 14:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=539342" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (10) TMI 1237 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369271</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the writ petition, setting aside the seizure order and show cause notice issued under the UPGST Act, 2017. The court emphasized the petitioner&#039;s compliance efforts, timely submission of the E-way bill, and the genuine nature of the transaction. It ruled in favor of the petitioner, highlighting the significance of considering taxpayer compliance and the timing of regulatory changes in tax laws when assessing penalties and seizures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369271</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>