https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402960 The court quashed detention orders based on misclassification in one case and partially in another, but sustained detention in a third case due to procedural lapses in transportation documents. It emphasized utilizing the appellate authority for challenging adjudication orders under Section 129 (3) of the GST Act, directing the return of bank guarantees and refraining from invoking them to allow petitioners to seek appellate remedies. en-us Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 22 Mar 2025 10:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402960 The court quashed detention orders based on misclassification in one case and partially in another, but sustained detention in a third case due to procedural lapses in transportation documents. It emphasized utilizing the appellate authority for challenging adjudication orders under Section 129 (3) of the GST Act, directing the return of bank guarantees and refraining from invoking them to allow petitioners to seek appellate remedies. Case-Laws GST Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=402960