Ground of Writ-The Petitioner challenged the order passed by the learned Single Judge under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017, concerning the confiscation of his vehicle. The Petitioner contended that he had no involvement in any tax evasion and further contended that a valid notice was not served in accordance with Section 169 of the said Act. It was further argued that the seizure of the vehicle was carried out without adherence to the due legal process prescribed under Section 130(4) of the CGST Act, 2017, and that the notice was served via WhatsApp, which is not a mode of service permitted under the GST provisions.
Order-The Court ruled in favour of the Petitioner by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the learned Single Judge, as well as the order of confiscation/detention of the Petitioner's vehicle.The Court further directed the Respondent to issue a fresh notice in compliance with the provisions of Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017, and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law after affording the Petitioner an opportunity of hearing.The said exercise is to be completed within three weeks from the date the Petitioner appears before the Authority, which shall be within one week from the date of this order.
GST Case Law Mathai MV Verus The Senior Enforcement Officer
Citation-2025 TAXONATION 1569 (KERALA)
Authors-Bhogavalli Mallikarjuna Gupta & Siddharth Surana
SUBSCRIBE GST E-LIBRARY (INDIA'S HIGHEST GST CASE LAW DATA)
FOR MORE UPDATE ON GST/ IT JOIN OUR FREE WHATSAPP GROUP BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK https://chat.whatsapp.com/C8VB6F6VHme3A061UDQKhj
