https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358419 The HC quashed the seizure order issued under Section 129(1) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017, holding that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Although the goods were seized for transportation without a valid E-way bill and a GSTIN mismatch, the court found the seizure unjustified as the tax invoice and E-way bill were available before the seizure. The order lacked details of the dealer and mobile number, and the petitioner was granted time to respond after detention. The writ petition was allowed, and the seizure order was set aside in favor of the petitioner. en-us Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Jul 2025 10:18:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358419 The HC quashed the seizure order issued under Section 129(1) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017, holding that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice. Although the goods were seized for transportation without a valid E-way bill and a GSTIN mismatch, the court found the seizure unjustified as the tax invoice and E-way bill were available before the seizure. The order lacked details of the dealer and mobile number, and the petitioner was granted time to respond after detention. The writ petition was allowed, and the seizure order was set aside in favor of the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Tue, 03 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358419