https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381639 Gold jewellery shown by delivery challans and issue vouchers to belong to third-party petitioners could not be kept under continued seizure or treated as liable to confiscation in proceedings against a hallmarking dealer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The HC held that Section 130 applies only where goods are supplied or received in contravention of the Act with intent to evade tax, and that third-party goods cannot be confiscated merely because they were found during inspection of another person's premises. The seizure was valid only to the limited extent necessary to complete enquiry into the hallmarker's own tax and penalty liability, after which the jewellery had to be released. en-us Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 11:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381639 Gold jewellery shown by delivery challans and issue vouchers to belong to third-party petitioners could not be kept under continued seizure or treated as liable to confiscation in proceedings against a hallmarking dealer under the State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The HC held that Section 130 applies only where goods are supplied or received in contravention of the Act with intent to evade tax, and that third-party goods cannot be confiscated merely because they were found during inspection of another person's premises. The seizure was valid only to the limited extent necessary to complete enquiry into the hallmarker's own tax and penalty liability, after which the jewellery had to be released. Case-Laws GST Tue, 09 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=381639