1. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant, a proprietary concern, has prayed for the following reliefs;

“(A) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the Respondents to forthwith release truck number GJ-04-AW-9027 along with goods contained therein;

(B) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned confiscation notice dated 28.08.2020 in Form GST MOV-10 (annexed at Annexure A);

(C) Pending notice, admission and final hearing of the petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith release truck number GJ-04-AW-9027 along with goods contained therein and stay further proceedings pursuant to impugned confiscation notice dated 28.08.2020 (annexed at Annexure A);

(D) Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer C may kindly be granted;

(E) Such other relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your petitioner shall forever pray.”

2. It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicant has been served with a notice dated 28th August, 2020 issued in the Form GST MOV-10 calling upon the writ applicant to show-cause as to why the goods along with the vehicle seized under Section 129 of the Act should not be confiscated under Section 130 of the Act, 2017.

3. It is this notice which is made the subject matter of challenge in the present writ application.

4. We need not delve much into the facts of this case as we are of the view that the final order of confiscation in Form GST MOV-11 is yet to be passed. We expect the writ applicant to appear before the authority and make good his case that the goods and the vehicle is not liable to be confiscated under Section 130 of the Act. Ultimately, if the show-cause notice in the Form GST MOV-10 is discharged, then that would be the end of the matter. However, in the event if final order of confiscation in the Form GST MOV-11 is passed, then the writ applicant will have the remedy of filing a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Act. As on date, we are considering a limited question whether the goods and the conveyance should be ordered to be released subject to certain terms and conditions pending the confiscation proceedings.

5. Mr. Sheth pointed out that his client is ready and willing to deposit ₹ 06,64,000/- towards the tax and penalty and is also ready and willing to furnish Bank Guarantee of the amount of ₹ 18,44,634/- being 50% of the amount of fine in lieu of confiscation of goods.

6. In view of the aforesaid statement of Mr. Sheth, we are inclined to order release of the goods and the vehicle on the condition that the writ applicant shall deposit the amount of ₹ 06,64,000/- within a period of one week from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order with the concerned authority and shall also furnish Bank Guarantee of the amount of ₹ 18,44,634/-. If these two conditions are fulfilled, then the authority concerned shall immediately release the goods and the vehicle.

7. We clarify that we have otherwise not gone into the merits of the matter. The confiscation proceedings shall proceed further in accordance with law and the same shall be decided by the concerned authority on its own merits.

8. With the above, this writ application stands disposed of.