2025 (12) TMI 1732

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA) 1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms. Shrunjal Shah waives service of notice of rule. 2. While passing the order dated 11.12.2025, we had recorded the submissions advanced by learned advocate Mr. Avinash Poddar for the petitioner that the issue raised in the present petition is squarely covered by the decision in case of Khatu Enterprises vs. State of Gujarat, reported in [2025] 180 taxmann.com 247.(Gujarat). 3. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned Assistant Government Pleader is unable to controvert that the issue is squarely covered in the said judgment. 4. The Petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y, the petitioner became aware of the clerical error regarding the incorrect vehicle number in the E-Way bill. Immediately thereafter, at 07:47 p.m. on the same day, the petitioner generated a consolidated E-way bill reflecting the correct vehicle number GJ01CT4597 and duly produced the same before the detaining officer. 7. That on 10.11.2025 a detailed reply was submitted to the respondent authority explaining that petitioner is only the transporter and not the owner of the consignment, and that the interception occurred only because the vehicle number in the E-Way Bills was wrongly entered due to two vehicles being loaded at the same time 8. Thereafter, it appears that the respondent No.3 issued a Notice in Form GST MOV-07 under Sec....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mmunicated to the petitioner by any mode, which is contrary to the procedure prescribed under Rule 142 of the CGST Rules, 2017. 12. It is contended that, the impugned order dated 19.11.2025 was passed in gross violation of the mandatory requirement under Section 129(3) of the GST Act, which mandates that the proper officer pass the order within seven clear days from the issuance of notice. In the present case, the notice in Form GST MOV-07 was issued on 10.11.2025, but the order was passed on 19.11.2025, thereby violating the principles of natural justice and rendering the order illegal, arbitrary, and without jurisdiction. 13. At this stage, we may refer to the decision of Coordinate Bench in the case of Khatu Enterprises vs. State o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ngly, allowed. The impugned order of detention of goods and vehicle dated 6.5.2025 issued in Form GST MOV-06 is hereby quashed and set-aside, in view of the provisions of Section 129(3) of the GST Act, and the respondent authorities are directed to release the goods in question and the conveyance bearing number RJ-14GN-6007 and RJ-14GN-6017 forthwith. 16.1 We, however, make it clear that the petitioner is required to reply to the notice issued in Form GST MOV-10 dated 6.8.2025 by the respondent No. 3, if not filed within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order along with an undertaking to pay the fine in lieu of confiscation of the goods and conveyance if any order under Section 130 of the GST Act is pa....