https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443165 The HC found that detention of goods due to a typographical invoice error was unjustified. The respondent violated Section 129(3) by not passing orders within 7 days and improperly penalized the petitioner for a third-party mistake. The court modified the penalty, directing release of goods and instructing authorities to address the error with the original invoice issuer. The writ petition was allowed without imposing costs. en-us Tue, 08 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 21 Apr 2025 11:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443165 The HC found that detention of goods due to a typographical invoice error was unjustified. The respondent violated Section 129(3) by not passing orders within 7 days and improperly penalized the petitioner for a third-party mistake. The court modified the penalty, directing release of goods and instructing authorities to address the error with the original invoice issuer. The writ petition was allowed without imposing costs. Case-Laws GST Tue, 08 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=443165