https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777510 Excess stock detected during a survey at business premises was held to require recourse to the GST machinery for determination and recovery under sections 73 and 74, rather than confiscation under section 130 of the CGST Act read with rule 120. The Court reiterated that mere stock discrepancy does not justify initiation of section 130 proceedings on those facts. The impugned confiscation order was quashed, and relief was granted to the petitioner. en-us Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 30 Aug 2025 08:31:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777510 Excess stock detected during a survey at business premises was held to require recourse to the GST machinery for determination and recovery under sections 73 and 74, rather than confiscation under section 130 of the CGST Act read with rule 120. The Court reiterated that mere stock discrepancy does not justify initiation of section 130 proceedings on those facts. The impugned confiscation order was quashed, and relief was granted to the petitioner. Case-Laws GST Wed, 27 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777510