^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

BDG CONCAST vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
(Allahabad High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

SHEKHAR B. SARAF
MANJIVE SHUKLA

Pet. Counsel

Vishwjit

Res. Counsel

C.s.c.

Petitioner / Applicant	BDG CONCAST
Respondent	STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
Court	Allahabad High Court
State	Uttar Pradesh
Date	Sep 20, 2024
Order No.	Writ Tax No. - 1166 of 2024
Citation	2024(9) TAXREPLY 11044
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the detention order dated July 16, 2024 and also consequential notices issued subsequent to the said detention order. 3. Mr. Vishwjit, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the detention of the particular goods was carried out on the ground that correct documents were not travelling with the truck. Furthermore, the order in Form GST MOV-06 being the detention order states that no documents have been produced to indicate how the petitioner purchased the said goods which were being sold to M/s Shree Lakshman Rolling Mill by the petitioner. 4. Upon perusal of the documents annexed to the writ petition it is clear that the goods were sold by the Steel Authority of India Ltd. to Balaji Enterprises, Sirsa and subsequently, Balaji Enterprises, Sirsa by invoice dat....