<?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 (7) TMI 1162 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755942</link>
    <description>HC allowed the writ petition challenging an appellate order related to goods interception under CGST Act. The court found the appellate authority&#039;s order legally unsustainable, as it failed to provide cogent reasons for reversing the original finding of tax avoidance intent. The original seizure order under Section 130 was effectively restored, quashing the impugned appellate order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 May 2025 17:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=761132" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (7) TMI 1162 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755942</link>
      <description>HC allowed the writ petition challenging an appellate order related to goods interception under CGST Act. The court found the appellate authority&#039;s order legally unsustainable, as it failed to provide cogent reasons for reversing the original finding of tax avoidance intent. The original seizure order under Section 130 was effectively restored, quashing the impugned appellate order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=755942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>