HC held that, although the procedural requirements under s.68...

HC held that, although the procedural requirements under s.68 and r.138 CGST Rules for movement of goods were ostensibly complied with and the vehicle was no longer in transit, the petitioner's conduct disentitled it to equitable relief under Art. 226. The record established that the petitioner, in collusion with others, had devised a systematic scheme to defraud the revenue by fabricating sham transactions and availing fraudulent input tax credit through bogus entities and fictitious outward liabilities, exploiting systemic gaps in the GST framework. HC declined to interfere with the seizure and detention proceedings, refused the relief of release of goods and conveyance, and dismissed the writ petition with costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to be recovered from the petitioner-company through its Director.