<?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>2020 (11) TMI 422 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400667</link>
    <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, quashing the confiscation order under Section 130 of the GST Act. The respondents were directed to proceed under Section 129(3) instead. The petitioners were allowed to clear the goods and vehicle upon furnishing a bank guarantee for tax and penalty amounts. A three-week grace period was granted for appellate remedies.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2025 18:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627626" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 422 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400667</link>
      <description>The court ruled in favor of the petitioners, quashing the confiscation order under Section 130 of the GST Act. The respondents were directed to proceed under Section 129(3) instead. The petitioners were allowed to clear the goods and vehicle upon furnishing a bank guarantee for tax and penalty amounts. A three-week grace period was granted for appellate remedies.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Nov 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>