<?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>2024 (1) TMI 1106 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448707</link>
    <description>The HC quashed the impugned orders dated August 30, 2017, and November 22, 2018, issued under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court found no evidence of tax evasion and determined that the penalties imposed were excessive. The decision was supported by previous judgments, noting the authorities&#039; failure to account for legislative changes. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted consequential reliefs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2024 18:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=741465" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (1) TMI 1106 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448707</link>
      <description>The HC quashed the impugned orders dated August 30, 2017, and November 22, 2018, issued under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The Court found no evidence of tax evasion and determined that the penalties imposed were excessive. The decision was supported by previous judgments, noting the authorities&#039; failure to account for legislative changes. Consequently, the writ petition was allowed, and the petitioner was granted consequential reliefs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448707</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>