https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789530 Representation through an authorised advocate was permitted in GST detention proceedings, and insisting on the taxpayer's personal appearance was unwarranted where the consignment documents identified the consignor and consignee. The detention scheme under Section 129 required prompt hearing and a time-bound determination of ownership and release, particularly where the goods were said to be perishable and no formal seizure order had been passed for an extended period. The authorities were therefore required to hear the consignee, proceed under the statutory framework, and release the goods and vehicle if payment under Section 129(1)(a) was accepted. en-us Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789530 Representation through an authorised advocate was permitted in GST detention proceedings, and insisting on the taxpayer's personal appearance was unwarranted where the consignment documents identified the consignor and consignee. The detention scheme under Section 129 required prompt hearing and a time-bound determination of ownership and release, particularly where the goods were said to be perishable and no formal seizure order had been passed for an extended period. The authorities were therefore required to hear the consignee, proceed under the statutory framework, and release the goods and vehicle if payment under Section 129(1)(a) was accepted. Case-Laws GST Tue, 07 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789530