M/S. A.C. Enterprise vs. State Of Gujarat

SCA/13050/2026HC GujaratGSTCNR GJHC24065751202612 October 2026Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA,HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Held

The Court noted that on September 17, 2026, it was informed that the order in MOV-10 had been passed, and the petitioner's counsel was asked to take instructions. On September 25, 2026, the Revenue submitted that the petition had become infructuous due to the release of goods and conveyance under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017. On the final date of hearing, October 12, 2026, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Consequently, the Court dismissed the matter for non-prosecution. The Court did not decide on the merits of the original challenge, if any, nor did it delve into the specifics of the Section 129 proceedings or the MOV-10 order.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s. A.C. Enterprise, filed a Special Civil Application before the Gujarat High Court challenging an order related to MOV-10. On September 17, 2026, the Court was informed by the learned AGP that the order in MOV-10 had been passed, rendering the petition's averments moot. The petitioner's counsel was directed to take instructions. Subsequently, on September 25, 2026, the learned AGP submitted that the writ petition had become infructuous due to the subsequent release of goods and conveyance under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017. The matter was adjourned. On October 12, 2026, no one appeared on behalf of the petitioner.

Key Issues

1. Whether the present writ petition has become infructuous in light of the subsequent release of goods and conveyance under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner did not present any arguments on the final date of hearing. However, the initial filing of the writ petition suggests a challenge to an order related to MOV-10 and potentially the seizure of goods and conveyance. Revenue's Contention: The learned AGP for the State argued that the writ petition had become infructuous due to the subsequent release of goods and conveyance under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017. This implies that the grievance raised in the petition was resolved by the executive action of releasing the goods.

Sections Cited

Section 129

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
C/SCA/13050/2026 ORDER DATED: 12/10/2026 (GJHC240657512026) IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13050 of 2026 ========================================================== M/S. A.C. ENTERPRISE Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. ========================================================== Appearance: MR BM MANGUKIYA(437) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MS BELA A PRAJAPATI(1946) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 MR RAJ TANNA, AGP for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI Date : 12/10/2026

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

1.

On 17.09.2026, this Court has passed the following order: “Learned AGP Ms. Tanushree Shrimal has submitted that the order in MOV-10 has already been passed, hence, the averments made in the present writ petition would no longer exist. Learned advocate Mr. B.M Mangukiya for the petitioner shall take appropriate instructions in the matter. List the matter on 25.09.2026.”

2.

Thereafter on 25.09

The judgment continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Reproduced from the public record of the Gujarat High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.