https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397264 The court directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the penalty and provide a bank guarantee for the remaining amount to secure the release of the detained consignment. After compliance, the court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to challenge the penalty through the statutory appeal process under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 within the specified timeframe. The court clarified that the judgment did not express any opinion on the case's merits and ensured that the appeal would not be rejected based on the limitation period if filed within four weeks. en-us Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2025 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397264 The court directed the petitioner to deposit 50% of the penalty and provide a bank guarantee for the remaining amount to secure the release of the detained consignment. After compliance, the court disposed of the writ petition, granting the petitioner liberty to challenge the penalty through the statutory appeal process under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 within the specified timeframe. The court clarified that the judgment did not express any opinion on the case's merits and ensured that the appeal would not be rejected based on the limitation period if filed within four weeks. Case-Laws GST Wed, 05 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=397264