1. The present petition is filed by the petitioner, claiming to be the owner of the conveyance i.e. the Truck bearing registration No. GJ-01- HT- 8461, which was seized and subsequently confiscated vide the impugned order dated 21.11.2020 passed by the State Tax Officer (1) Mobile Squad, i.e. respondent No. 1.

2. The learned Advocate Mr.Nanavati, appearing on behalf of Nanavati & Company for the petitioner submits that the impugned order of confiscation dated 21.11.2020 has been challenged mainly on the ground that the petitioner, i.e. the owner of the conveyance, has not been granted an opportunity of hearing before passing the said order of confiscation. He also submits that as such, the owner of the vehicle has not been given even an option to pay, in lieu of the confiscation of conveyance, the fine equal to the tax payable on the goods being transported thereon, in view of the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the “CGST Act”) . He also submits that according to the petitioner, there is an arithmetical error in the calculation of the tax amount calculated in the impugned order. Be that as it may, Mr.Nanavati submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to make payment of fine i.e. ₹ 52,000/- towards tobacco and ₹ 179,234/- towards pan masala, in aggregate ₹ 2,31,234/-, as mentioned in the impugned order by exercising the option as contemplated in the said proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 130 of the CGST Act and his conveyance be released accordingly, subject to his right of approaching the concerned authority for raising an objection with regard to the error of calculation in the amount of tax.

3. The learned AGP Mr.Utkarsh Sharma, on instruction, states that he has no objection, if the Court passes appropriate order considering the submissions of Mr.Nanavati for the petitioner.

4. In view of the above, without going into the merits of the case, it is directed that the petitioner shall be at liberty to pay ₹ 2,31,234/- towards the amount of fine in lieu of the confiscation of the conveyance in question as contemplated in the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 130 of the CGST Act, before the concerned respondent authority within a week from today. If such payment is made by the petitioner, then the concerned respondent authority i.e. respondent No.1 shall release the conveyance in question forthwith. However, it shall be open for the petitioner to raise the issue with regard to the error in calculation of the amount of tax as calculated in the impugned order before the concerned authority and the same shall be considered by the respondent No.1 authority in accordance with law. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the respondent No.1, he shall take recourse to the remedy as may be available under the CGST Act.

5. Under the circumstances, the impugned order dated 21.11.2020 (in Form GST-MOV-11) to the extent of confiscation of the conveyance in question is set aside. It is clarified that the Court has not gone into the merits of the case, nor has gone into the issue of legality and validity of the confiscation of goods in question.

6. Subject to the afore-stated direction, the petition stands disposed of.