https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766864 HC dismissed the petition and upheld seizure of goods as lawful under the GST Act. The court held that in the original/summary proceeding the onus rests on the assessee to produce cogent material proving actual physical movement and genuineness of transactions; the burden shifts to revenue only in reassessment proceedings. The petitioner failed to demonstrate movement from the stated origin (no truck/toll records or other corroboration) and thus invoices and documents were not shown to be genuine. Seizure for under-valuation with intent to evade tax was justified and no interference was warranted. en-us Mon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Nov 2025 14:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766864 HC dismissed the petition and upheld seizure of goods as lawful under the GST Act. The court held that in the original/summary proceeding the onus rests on the assessee to produce cogent material proving actual physical movement and genuineness of transactions; the burden shifts to revenue only in reassessment proceedings. The petitioner failed to demonstrate movement from the stated origin (no truck/toll records or other corroboration) and thus invoices and documents were not shown to be genuine. Seizure for under-valuation with intent to evade tax was justified and no interference was warranted. Case-Laws GST Mon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766864