https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751110 Allahabad HC allowed the petition challenging confiscation of goods and penalty imposition. The court found that authorities failed to properly weigh or count stock during survey, instead relying on estimates without legal basis. The 10-month delay in issuing show cause notice after survey demonstrated callous conduct. Since burden of proof lies with the Department for confiscation and penalty, and physical verification could have been conducted but wasn't, the excess stock finding based on estimates was rejected. The court quashed confiscation and penalty orders, setting aside proceedings under Section 74 of the Act. en-us Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 Apr 2025 12:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751110 Allahabad HC allowed the petition challenging confiscation of goods and penalty imposition. The court found that authorities failed to properly weigh or count stock during survey, instead relying on estimates without legal basis. The 10-month delay in issuing show cause notice after survey demonstrated callous conduct. Since burden of proof lies with the Department for confiscation and penalty, and physical verification could have been conducted but wasn't, the excess stock finding based on estimates was rejected. The court quashed confiscation and penalty orders, setting aside proceedings under Section 74 of the Act. Case-Laws GST Wed, 03 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751110