<?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 (3) TMI 785 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451004</link>
    <description>HC quashed penalty proceedings under Section 129(3) of UP GST Act, finding the search and seizure under Section 67 conducted without proper jurisdiction. The court determined that authorities lacked valid reasons to believe and improperly targeted an immovable property. Consequently, the penalty orders were set aside without imposing costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2025 14:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=747326" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 785 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451004</link>
      <description>HC quashed penalty proceedings under Section 129(3) of UP GST Act, finding the search and seizure under Section 67 conducted without proper jurisdiction. The court determined that authorities lacked valid reasons to believe and improperly targeted an immovable property. Consequently, the penalty orders were set aside without imposing costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=451004</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>