https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416272 The court upheld the order of confiscation under section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, based on the Proper Officer's satisfaction regarding the absence of mandatory documents and intention to evade tax. It emphasized that disputed factual questions should be addressed through the appellate authority, not under Article 226, to maintain the Act's integrity. The court dismissed the writ petition, highlighting the availability of the appeal remedy under section 107 of the Act and the importance of not interfering with the Proper Officer's satisfaction when supported by transaction circumstances. en-us Mon, 25 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 24 Dec 2021 12:57:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416272 The court upheld the order of confiscation under section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, based on the Proper Officer's satisfaction regarding the absence of mandatory documents and intention to evade tax. It emphasized that disputed factual questions should be addressed through the appellate authority, not under Article 226, to maintain the Act's integrity. The court dismissed the writ petition, highlighting the availability of the appeal remedy under section 107 of the Act and the importance of not interfering with the Proper Officer's satisfaction when supported by transaction circumstances. Case-Laws GST Mon, 25 Oct 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416272