https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401161 The court found that the 1st respondent was legally authorized to pass the impugned proceedings based on a Gazette notification. It clarified that proceedings under Sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act can proceed simultaneously but emphasized the need for a firm opinion before invoking Section 130. The court set aside the confiscation order dated 04.02.2020, directing the 1st respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry, provide a personal hearing to the petitioners, and pass a new order with proper reasons within eight weeks, maintaining the detention of goods and conveyance until then. en-us Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Mar 2025 13:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401161 The court found that the 1st respondent was legally authorized to pass the impugned proceedings based on a Gazette notification. It clarified that proceedings under Sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act can proceed simultaneously but emphasized the need for a firm opinion before invoking Section 130. The court set aside the confiscation order dated 04.02.2020, directing the 1st respondent to conduct a fresh enquiry, provide a personal hearing to the petitioners, and pass a new order with proper reasons within eight weeks, maintaining the detention of goods and conveyance until then. Case-Laws GST Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=401161