Case Details: Vivek Verma vs. State of Gujarat - [2026] 182 taxmann.com 884 (Gujarat)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- A.S. Supehia & Pranav Trivedi, JJ.
- Ms Vaibhavi K Parikh for the Petitioner.
- Ms Pooja Ashar, AGP for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The petitioner, a cotton yarn trader, arranged transportation of goods but the vehicle was diverted due to traffic and intercepted by authorities, the driver produced the invoice, e-invoice, transport receipt, and e-way bills, and detention proceedings were initiated by issuing MOV-1 and MOV-2, with verification confirming that the documents tallied with the invoices, yet the proper officer issued MOV-4 and MOV-6 and, without determining penalty during detention, proceeded directly to confiscation by issuing MOV-10 and MOV-11, prompting the petitioner to challenge the action by writ. The matter was accordingly placed before the High Court.
High Court Held
The High Court held that when a statutory appellate remedy is available under Section 107 of the CGST Act, the writ petition ought not to be entertained in the absence of exceptional circumstances. The Court observed that the grievance raised pertained to the propriety of invoking confiscation proceedings under Section 130 and the alleged non-compliance with procedural requirements. It was held that the determination of whether issuance of MOV-10 and MOV-11 without prior penalty determination was justified. Accordingly, without expressing any view on the merits of the controversy, the petition was disposed, with all contentions kept open for consideration and decision on merits by the appellate authority.
The post Assessee Must File Appeal Against Direct GST Confiscation | HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
