9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 346 - HC - GSTSecurity deposit - Release of detained goods - the goods not being accompanied by a valid document as contemplated under the CGST and SGST Act and Rules - Held that - it is apparent that there is no intention to evade payment of tax - on finding that the transportation of the goods was not accompanied by the valid documents as contemplated under the CGST/SGST Act and Rules, the writ petition is disposed off by directing the 1st respondent to release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner, on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount demanded - petition disposed off.
Issues: Detention of consignment of ready-made textile goods due to lack of valid documents under CGST and SGST Act, demand for security deposit for release, submission of delivery note under Kerala Value Added Tax Act, issuance of bank guarantee, adjudication process by the adjudicating authority, production of judgment and writ petition before the respondent.
In this case, a consignment of ready-made textile goods was detained by the respondents due to the absence of valid documents as required under the CGST and SGST Act and Rules. The petitioner challenged the demand for a security deposit for the release of the goods and the vehicle. The court observed that although the petitioner had submitted a delivery note in Form 15 of the Kerala Value Added Tax Act, it did not comply with the specific requirements under the CGST/SGST Act and Rules. The court directed the 1st respondent to release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner upon the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in the detention notice. Furthermore, the court ordered that the 1st respondent must transmit the files to the adjudicating authority for adjudication within two months from the date of receipt of the judgment. The adjudicating authority was instructed to pass orders after hearing the petitioner, without being influenced by the observations made in the judgment. Additionally, the petitioner was required to provide a copy of the judgment and the writ petition to the 1st respondent for record-keeping purposes.
|
