<?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>2025 (4) TMI 738 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768824</link>
    <description>Where detention proceedings were already underway under the GST regime, the HC declined to order immediate unconditional release of the goods and vehicle and instead allowed the statutory process to continue. It directed prompt physical verification of the entire consignment when the petitioner appeared, and provided that if the tax and penalty demanded under section 129 were paid, release should follow in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2025 08:36:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=813981" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (4) TMI 738 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768824</link>
      <description>Where detention proceedings were already underway under the GST regime, the HC declined to order immediate unconditional release of the goods and vehicle and instead allowed the statutory process to continue. It directed prompt physical verification of the entire consignment when the petitioner appeared, and provided that if the tax and penalty demanded under section 129 were paid, release should follow in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=768824</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>