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 mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside impugned classification notice dated 28.11.2020 (annexed at Annexure-A)

(B) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, , order or direction quashing and setting aside impugned detention order dated 28.11.2020 (annexed at Annexure-B)

(C ) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, or order directing the Respondents to forthwith release the truck number GJ-05-BZ-6691 along with goods contained therein;

(D) In the alternative, 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 provisionally release the truck number GJ-05-BZ-6691 along with goods contained therein under Section 67(6) of the GST Act.

(E) Pending notice, admission and final hearing of the petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondents to forthwith release the truck number GJ-05-BZ-6691 along with goods contained therein and further proceedings pursuant to impugned classification notice dated 28.11.2020 (annexed at Annexure-A) may please be stayed;

(F) Ex parte and interim relief in terms of prayer B may kindly be granted;

(G) 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 petitioner shall forever pray.”

2. It appears from the materials on record that the writ applicant is a proprietary concern and it received its order for purchase of yarn from the customer located at U.P. The writ applicant has a sister concern by name M/s.Guru Fibres in the State of Maharashtra. The writ applicant asked its sister concern to deliver the goods at U.P. It is the case of the writ applicant that it prepared the invoices and generated the on-line bills for such movement of the goods. It is expected by the writ applicant that in inadvertently it fails to mention the place of dispatch at Maharashtra in the E-way bill.

3. While the goods were in transit, the Checking Squad of the GST intercepted the vehicle and, thereafter, passed an order of detention dated 28.11.2020 in Form GST MOV-6 under Section 129 of the GST Act. As the goods and the vehicle came to be detained, the writ applicant preferred an application for provisional release of the same in accordance with Section 67(6) of the Act.

4. It appears that no order has been passed on such application, seeking provisional release of the goods and vehicle till this date. On the contrary, it appears that on the very same day and date of seizure, i.e, 28.11.2020, confiscation notice in Form GST MOV-10 came to be issued.

5. The writ applicant, being dissatisfied with the issuance notice in Form GST MOV-10 has come up with this writ application.

6. We have heard Mr. Uchit Sheth, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. K.M. Antani, the learned AGP appearing for the State-respondents.

7. Mr. Sheth has questioned the legality and validity of the very same action of issuing notice in Form GST MOV-10 under Section 130 of the Act on manifold grounds. However, we are of the view that we should not interfere at this point of time with the adjudication undertaken pursuant to the notice in Form GST MOV-10. Ultimately, if final order of confiscation is passed under Section 130, it shall be open for the writ applicant to avail appropriate legal remedy available to him. However, we are of the view that the goods and the vehicle should not be allowed to remain under detention for an indefinite period of time. Mr. Sheth, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant submitted that his client would deposit an amount of ₹ 89,000/- towards the tax plus penalty plus interest, and upon deposit of such amount, the vehicle and the goods may be ordered to be released.

8. On the other hand, Mr. Antani, the learned AGP, would submit that if the Court is permitting the authority to adjudicate the notice in Form GST MOV-10, then there should not be any difficulty in releasing the goods and the vehicle upon deposit of the amount of ₹ 89,000/-

9. Having regard to the aforesaid, we direct the writ applicant to deposit an amount of ₹ 89,000/- with the respondent No.2 and upon deposit of such amount, the respondent No.2 shall, at the earliest, release the vehicle and the goods. We clarify that we have otherwise not gone into the merits of the matter.