https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414013 The Court allowed the petition, quashing the order passed under Section 129(3) of UPGST Rules, 2017, due to the absence of an E-way bill. Relying on a previous decision, the Court held that during a specific period, the E-way bill requirement was not applicable. Emphasizing the importance of legal precedents in tax matters, the Court dropped all consequential proceedings, highlighting the need to adhere to established legal principles in interpreting and applying tax laws. en-us Fri, 01 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Mar 2025 14:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414013 The Court allowed the petition, quashing the order passed under Section 129(3) of UPGST Rules, 2017, due to the absence of an E-way bill. Relying on a previous decision, the Court held that during a specific period, the E-way bill requirement was not applicable. Emphasizing the importance of legal precedents in tax matters, the Court dropped all consequential proceedings, highlighting the need to adhere to established legal principles in interpreting and applying tax laws. Case-Laws GST Fri, 01 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414013