2020 (2) TMI 1510 - HC - GST

Maintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - Confiscation of detained goods - transportation of goods without valid e-Way bill - inter-State sale - HELD THAT - Since the order under challenge in this petition is appealable, the petitioner are permitted to pursue such appeal for which, it is informed that limitation period has yet not expired. However, considering the facts of the case, the goods of the petitioner which are in the nature of TMT Bars, shall be released provisionally on the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax and penalty demand and furnishing a bond for securing the rest of the amount. Petition is disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
Detention, seizure, and confiscation of goods; Alleged transportation of goods without valid e-Way bill; Demand for tax and penalty; Statutory appeal under the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017; Provisional release of goods and vehicle.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a case where the petitioner's goods were detained, seized, and ordered to be confiscated by the GST authorities of the State due to an alleged transportation of goods without a valid e-Way bill, resulting in a tax and penalty demand of ?2,82,073. The competent authority passed an order to this effect on 08.01.2020. The petitioner contended that the goods were being transported in the course of inter-State sale and there was no lapse in carrying a valid e-Way bill until the goods were in transit. The petitioner expressed intent to appeal the order but sought provisional release of the goods under Section 129 (2) read with Section 67 (6) of the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the petition and relied on the contents of the affidavit-in-reply. The Court acknowledged that the order under challenge was appealable and permitted the petitioner to pursue such appeal within the unexpired limitation period. However, considering the circumstances, the Court ordered the provisional release of the petitioner's goods, TMT Bars, upon depositing 25% of the disputed tax and penalty demand and furnishing a bond for the remaining amount. Additionally, if the transporter also sought provisional release of the vehicle and offered a bond for the full value of the tax and penalty, the vehicle would be released in favor of the transporter.

In conclusion, the petition was disposed of with the Court allowing the petitioner to appeal the order while granting provisional release of the goods and vehicle under specified conditions. The judgment highlights the application of statutory provisions for appeal and provisional release in cases involving tax and penalty demands related to transportation of goods without valid documentation under the GST Act.