<?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>2023 (4) TMI 1348 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456776</link>
    <description>Detention and penalty under section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act were treated as unsustainable where the e-waybill had been downloaded before detention and the required particulars had already been disclosed. The court followed its earlier view that, on those facts, no irregularity could be attributed to the movement of goods merely because of the detention stage. The detention and penalty orders were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2025 11:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=764016" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (4) TMI 1348 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456776</link>
      <description>Detention and penalty under section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh GST Act were treated as unsustainable where the e-waybill had been downloaded before detention and the required particulars had already been disclosed. The court followed its earlier view that, on those facts, no irregularity could be attributed to the movement of goods merely because of the detention stage. The detention and penalty orders were therefore set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>