Sri Venkatasubbaiah C vs. Commercial Tax Officer
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner challenged the detention of goods and a conveyance, along with a subsequent notice (Form GST MOV-10) proposing confiscation and penalty under Section 130 of the GST Acts. The writ petitions sought the release of the detained goods and conveyance and the quashing of the confiscation notice.
Held
During the pendency of the writ petitions, the respondent authorities released the detained vehicle and communicated that the transaction in question was genuine. In light of this, the petitioner filed a memo seeking to withdraw the petitions, which the High Court accepted, thereby disposing of the writ petitions.
Key Issues
The key legal issues were the legality of the detention of goods and conveyance, and the validity of the notice for confiscation and penalty issued under Section 130 of the GST Acts.
Sections Cited
Section 130 (KGST/CGST Act, 2017), Section 20 (IGST Act, 2017), Section 11 (GST (Compensation to States) Act, 2017)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Heard together (2 matters)
Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORAL ORDER
Sri Shreehari K, the learned counsel for the petitioners, has filed a memo enclosing the proceedings dated 06.07.2026 stating thus:
“1. The petitioner humbly submits that pursuant to the issuance of MOV-10 [Annexure S in WP 19972/2026] proposing both the confiscation of goods & conveyance, and levy of both fine and penalty, the petitioner filed the present WP challenging the same. It is submitted that on 06.07.2026 the learned respondent No.1 has given a communication stating that the transaction in question is genuine and called upon the petitioner to withdraw the writ petitions listed today before this Hon’ble Court today. The Respondent No.1 has also released the vehicle yesterday and issued the GST MOV-05 which is enclosed herewith.
The petitioner humbly submits that he does not seek to pursue the writ petitions. It is therefore prayed to dispose the writ petition.” HC-KAR NC: 2026:KHC:34319 WP No. 18990 of 2026 C/W WP No. 19972 of 2026
In view of the afore, the petitions stand disposed of. (B M SHYAM PRASAD) JUDGE
AN/-
Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.