<?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>2022 (10) TMI 621 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429063</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging goods detention due to invoice name mismatch, directing the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal under GST Act. The court emphasized utilizing alternative remedy through Section 107 appeal process before the Joint Commissioner, effectively leaving the factual dispute to be resolved through administrative channels without interfering with the penalty and goods seizure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2025 15:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 621 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429063</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the writ petition challenging goods detention due to invoice name mismatch, directing the petitioner to pursue statutory appeal under GST Act. The court emphasized utilizing alternative remedy through Section 107 appeal process before the Joint Commissioner, effectively leaving the factual dispute to be resolved through administrative channels without interfering with the penalty and goods seizure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429063</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>