^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

GST Library Plans

Best GST Library

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
(From 22.09.25)

GST Rates
(Upto 21.09.25)

HSN Codes

GST Forms

My Favourites

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Staff Manager

GST Fees Manager

GST Login Tool

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

Find Consultants & Professionals

Launch Your Own Website @ 599/- p.m.

Buy Premium Tax Domains

🔒

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. |

Om Enterprises vs. Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeal) And Another
(Allahabad High Court)

Petitioner (Applicant)	Om Enterprises
Respondent	Additional Commissioner, Grade - 2 (Appeal) And Another
Court	Allahabad High Court
State	Uttar Pradesh
Date	Nov 13, 2025
Order No.	Writ Tax No. - 629 of 2023
Citation	2025(11) TAXREPLY 15027
Original Order
Hon'ble Judges	PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J.
Counsel for Petitioner	Mohit Kumar Shukla, Nipun Mohan, Tarun Agrawal
Counsel for Respondent	C.S.C.
My Favorites	Add to Fav ☆ Add to favorites.

TaxGPT

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

AA |

Short Summary: The court held that the impugned detention, seizure and penalty orders could not stand because the e-way bill for the consignment had been generated before interception (10:59 a.m. vs. detention at 11..... Subscribe to Read more

Listen this case

Find Similar Cases

ORDER
ORDER HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, J. 1. Heard Shri Rahul Krishna Agrawal, along with Shri Mohit Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned ACSC for the State - respondents. 2. The instant writ petition has been filed against the impugned order dated 03.12.2022 passed by the respondent no. 1 as well as the impugned order dated 21.12.2021 passed by the respondent no. 2. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a trader of TMT iron bars. He further submits that the goods in question were dispatched from Bulandshahar for which tax invoice was generated on 21.12.2021, but the e-way bill could not be generated as there was some technical glitch, but the same was generated on 21.12.2021 at 10.59 a.m. He further submits that the goods in question were intercepted by the Mobile Squad and on inspection, e-way bill was not there. He further submits that the vehicle in question was intercepted at 11.29 a.m. and show cause notice was ....