GST seizure disputes may justify conditional interim release of goods where the court finds a prima facie case and balances revenue interests.

In a GST seizure dispute, the High Court examined whether seized goods should be released pending the petitioner's challenge to an order passed under the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act. The Court noted that the search was conducted under Section 67(2) and the impugned order under Section 67(6), while the petitioner claimed that books of account were later produced and that the authority acted without proper verification. Finding that the matter required scrutiny, the Court granted interim protection, directed conditional release of the goods on part deposit and security for the balance, and allowed the petitioner to continue business pending further hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the seized goods should be released pending consideration of the petitioner's challenge to the order passed in exercise of powers under the GST law.

Analysis: The search had been conducted under Section 67(2) of the U.P. Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and the impugned order had been passed under Section 67(6) of that Act. The petitioner asserted that the books of account were subsequently produced and that the authority had proceeded without proper verification. The Court found that the matter required scrutiny and granted interim protection to enable continuation of business, while balancing the revenue's interest by requiring part deposit and security for the balance.

Conclusion: The seized goods were directed to be released on part deposit and furnishing of security, and the petitioner was permitted to carry on business.

Final Conclusion: Interim relief was granted in a tax seizure matter, with conditional release of the goods and further hearing of the challenge kept pending.

Ratio Decidendi: In a seizure dispute under GST, interim release may be ordered where the Court finds a prima facie case and balances it by imposing deposit and security conditions.

---