<?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 (9) TMI 1478 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759234</link>
    <description>Detained goods under the CGST Act were found releasable under the ownership-based route in Section 129(1)(a), not the penalty-based route in Section 129(1)(b), because the facts and issue were treated as materially similar to an earlier decision and no reason was found to depart from it. The impugned detention order dated 27 July 2024 was quashed and set aside, and the authorities were directed to proceed accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Sep 2024 18:32:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=770521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (9) TMI 1478 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759234</link>
      <description>Detained goods under the CGST Act were found releasable under the ownership-based route in Section 129(1)(a), not the penalty-based route in Section 129(1)(b), because the facts and issue were treated as materially similar to an earlier decision and no reason was found to depart from it. The impugned detention order dated 27 July 2024 was quashed and set aside, and the authorities were directed to proceed accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=759234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>