- Allahabad High Court found detention of goods unjustified in Vishal Steel Supplier v. State of U.P.
- Unlike VAT Act, there is no provision in CGST Act to disclose transportation route
- Petitioner transporting goods from Muzaffarnagar to Ghaziabad, intercepted at Hapur
- No discrepancies found in documentation, no evidence of intent to evade tax
- No requirement to disclose specific transportation route under GST framework
- Petitioner filed writ petition against detention orders
- Allahabad High Court held that there is no provision in CGST Act to disclose transportation route
- Court quashed detention orders and mandated refund of any amount deposited by Petitioner
Source: a2ztaxcorp.com
Note that this post was (partially) written with the help of AI. It is always useful to review the original source material, and where needed to obtain (local) advice from a specialist.
Latest Posts in "India"
- AAR Rules GST Applies to Small Packaged Shrimp Exports, Citing Retail Packaging Criteria
- Supreme Court to Decide if Leasehold Rights Transfer is Taxable Under GST Law
- Only Entity Named as Exporter in Customs Documents Can Claim Service Tax Refund: CESTAT
- CESTAT: Testing Services to Foreign Clients Qualify as ‘Export of Services’ under FTDR Act
- CESTAT Rules Dell India’s Services to Foreign Affiliates Qualify as Export, Allows Appeal
