<?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 (8) TMI 461 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756757</link>
    <description>Goods intercepted in transit without the tax invoice, bilty, e-way bill, or other required transport documents. As no material showed that the documents were produced at interception, before the authority, or before the Court, there was no basis to disturb the detention-related order under GST law. The challenge failed because the record did not establish compliance with the documentary requirements under the GST rules, and judicial interference was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 May 2025 23:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763418" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 461 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756757</link>
      <description>Goods intercepted in transit without the tax invoice, bilty, e-way bill, or other required transport documents. As no material showed that the documents were produced at interception, before the authority, or before the Court, there was no basis to disturb the detention-related order under GST law. The challenge failed because the record did not establish compliance with the documentary requirements under the GST rules, and judicial interference was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756757</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>