IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3897 of 2026 ==========================================================

M/S. VIJAY LAXMI TRADING Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR. AMAN REWARIA, FOR MR. KARTIK P KACHHAWAH(14410) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS. TANUSHREE SHRIMAL, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3 ==========================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRANAV TRIVEDI Date : 24/03/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA)

1. The present writ petition has been filed seeking direction for quashing and setting aside the show cause notice dated 08.10.2025 issued in Form GST DRC-01, the order of detention dated 08.10.2025 issued in Form GST MOV-06, the confiscation order dated 08.10.2025 issued in Form GST MOV-11 and the consequent demand order issued in Form GST DRC-07.

2. At the outset, we had advised Learned advocate Mr.Aman Rewaria for learned advocate Mr.Kartik Kachhawah appearing for the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of filing an appeal, however, he has invited order on merits.

3. It is submitted that the impugned action of the respondent is required to be quashed and set-aside as no order with regard to physical verification of the conveyance was passed and the computation of the penalty levied on the petitioner was also not provided by the concerned officer, on the interception of vehicle on 22.07.2025, hence such action is required to be quashed. It is submitted that all the orders were in consolidated manner placed on the portal and the petitioner could not identify the order passed under Form GST MOV-11, hence he could not produce it in the writ petition.

4. It is submitted that in fact the respondent competent authority passed the order in Form MOV-05 on 08.10.2025 whereas the goods and conveyance in fact were released on 26.07.2025 and he is not disputing the same. He has submitted that valid GST invoices were produced at the relevant time and the tax and penalty were already paid and the question of confiscation of goods does not arise. He has also submitted that the goods were not required to be confiscated by invoking Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax, 2017 (for short ‘the Act’). In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the decision of this Court passed in SCA No.9250 of 2020 dated 11.12.2025 in the case of M/s.Panchhi Traders through its authorised signatory Narendra Danabhai Daki vs. State of Gujarat Through Deputy Commissioner (Enforcement) & Another.

Thus, it is urged that the impugned orders may be quashed and set aside.

5. Per contra, learned Assistant Government Pleader Ms.Tanushree Shrimal has submitted that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative remedy in filing Appeal under the provision of Section 107 of the Act. It is submitted the petitioner has not come out with clean hands and she has tendered the Release Order MOV-05 dated 26.07.2025 acknowledged by the petitioner in his own handwriting. It is submitted that the goods and conveyance were released on 26.07.2025 at 5.30 p.m., after the petitioner had paid the requisite amount of penalty. She has further submitted that no grievance of any kind was raised at the relevant time and so far as the order dated 08.10.2025 in Form MOV-05 is concerned, the same is electronically uploaded on the Portal and categorically mentioned that the goods and conveyance are released on 26.07.2025. She has further submitted that the Form MOV-11 dated 26.07.2025 was also phsycially tendered to the petitioner and the same also bears its signature. Finally it is submitted that in absence of e-way bill, the respondent authority has resorted to invoking the provisions of Section 130 of the Act.

6. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties at length. We would like to mention that the petitioner has tried to carve out the c