1 By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

“A. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned detention order dated 21.9.2019 (annexed at Annexure A).

B. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the learned respondents to forthwith release vehicle bearing registration number RJ­09GA­6703 along with the goods contained therein.

C. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside impugned confiscation notice dated 23.9.2019 (annexed at Annexure B).

D. Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the learned respondents to forthwith release vehicle bearing registration number RJ­09GA­6703 along with the goods contained therein and further proceedings pursuant to the impugned confiscation notice (annexed at Annexure B) may pleased be stayed.

E. Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer D may kindly be granted.

F. Such further 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 petitioners shall forever pray.”

2 We take notice of the order dated 3rd October 2019 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court in the present matter. The order reads thus:

“1. Mr. Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioner, has submitted that while admittedly, the goods in question were not accompanied by an invoice or e­way bill during the course of transport, the goods are valued at less than ₹ 50,000/­ and hence, there was no necessity of providing an e­way bill. It was submitted that the goods in question are second hand goods and hence, the value of such supply is required to be determined in terms of Rule 32 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 and more particularly, sub­rule (5) thereof, which provides that where a taxable supply is provided by a person dealing in buying and selling of second hand goods i.e., used goods as such or after such minor processing which does not change the nature of the goods and where no input tax credit has been availed on the purchase of such goods, the value of supply shall be the difference between the selling price and the purchase price and where the value of such supply is negative, it shall be ignored. It was submitted that in the present case, the petitioner has already deposited the amount of tax and penalty, as computed under Rule 32(5) of the said Rules. It was submitted that the petitioner is not a fly by night operator and despite the petitioner having put forward a proper explanation, the respondents have still proceeded under section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and initiated proceedings for confiscation of the goods.

2.Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocate for the petitioner, issue Notice, returnable on 23.10.2019.

By way of ad­interim relief, the respondents are directed to release the vehicle bearing registration No. RJ09GA6703 along with the goods contained therein subject to the petitioner filing an undertaking that in case if, ultimately, it does not succeed in the proceedings, it shall deposit the balance amount payable, as may be computed by the respondent authorities, which shall be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge any adverse order that may be passed. Direct service is permitted.”

3 We have heard Mr. Uchit Sheth, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents.

4 It is brought to our notice that the matter is at the stage of MOV 10 i.e. the show cause notice as to why the goods should not be confiscated under Section 130 of the GST Act, 2017. As the goods have already been released pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court referred to above and the matter is at the stage of MOV 10, then we would not like to go into this matter any further. We clarify that if, ultimately, any final order of confiscation is passed in Form GST MOV 11 under Section 130 of the Act, then it shall be open for the writ applicant to challenge such order by way of an appeal under Section 107 of the Act.

5 With the above, this writ application stands disposed of. We clarify that we have otherwise not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.