<?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>2026 (5) TMI 57 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790855</link>
    <description>Pending revisional proceedings initiated by notice under Section 108, conditional release of detained goods was permitted on payment of the specified amount and filing of an affidavit undertaking compliance with the final revisional order. The Court noted that no final revisional order had yet been passed, and left the petitioner&#039;s jurisdictional and other objections open to be raised before the Revisional Authority. Because the appellate order had already resulted in a quantified demand and the goods remained under restraint, the arrangement was framed to secure revenue while preserving the revisional process. The relief was therefore limited and expressly subject to the outcome of revision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:14:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899343" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 57 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790855</link>
      <description>Pending revisional proceedings initiated by notice under Section 108, conditional release of detained goods was permitted on payment of the specified amount and filing of an affidavit undertaking compliance with the final revisional order. The Court noted that no final revisional order had yet been passed, and left the petitioner&#039;s jurisdictional and other objections open to be raised before the Revisional Authority. Because the appellate order had already resulted in a quantified demand and the goods remained under restraint, the arrangement was framed to secure revenue while preserving the revisional process. The relief was therefore limited and expressly subject to the outcome of revision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>GST</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790855</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>