https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771335 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging GST proceedings involving stock shortage during search and seizure operations. The petitioner's appeal was rejected by appellate authority due to filing beyond statutory limitation period, with no power to condone delay beyond the outer cap under Section 107(4). The court held that proper officers have valid jurisdiction under Sections 67, 122, and 130 of OGST Act 2017 for inspection, search, seizure, and confiscation of goods. Since the petitioner paid redemption fine and penalty without recorded protest and admitted stock shortage, the challenge was not maintainable. Following coordinate bench precedent, payment without protest precludes challenging the confiscation procedure. en-us Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Jun 2025 17:39:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771335 The HC dismissed a writ petition challenging GST proceedings involving stock shortage during search and seizure operations. The petitioner's appeal was rejected by appellate authority due to filing beyond statutory limitation period, with no power to condone delay beyond the outer cap under Section 107(4). The court held that proper officers have valid jurisdiction under Sections 67, 122, and 130 of OGST Act 2017 for inspection, search, seizure, and confiscation of goods. Since the petitioner paid redemption fine and penalty without recorded protest and admitted stock shortage, the challenge was not maintainable. Following coordinate bench precedent, payment without protest precludes challenging the confiscation procedure. Case-Laws GST Thu, 15 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771335