9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 24 - HC - GSTDetention of goods with vehicle - furnishing of bank guarantee - Held that - Identical issue decided in the case of RENJI LAL DAMODARAN, DAMU & SONS SALES CORPORATION VERSUS STATE TAX OFFICER, KOTTARAKKARA AND ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER, KARUNAGAPALLY 2018 (8) TMI 1145 - KERALA HIGH COURT - respondent authorities are directed to release the petitioner s goods and vehicle on his furnishing Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due and a bond for the value of goods in the form as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules - petition disposed off.
Issues:
Petitioner imported car accessories from China, cleared goods through Chennai Port, transported to Ernakulam, detained by respondent authorities, demanded penalty, filed writ petition seeking relief to quash Ext.P6 and release vehicle. Analysis: The petitioner imported car accessories from China, cleared the goods through Chennai Port, and transported them to Ernakulam based on specific documents like Ext.P4 e-way bill and Ext.P7 invoice. However, the vehicle and goods were detained by the respondent authorities, who demanded a penalty under Ext.P6. In response, the petitioner filed a writ petition seeking relief. The petitioner requested the court to issue a writ of certiorari or appropriate directions to quash Ext.P6 and release the vehicle within a specified time limit. The court referred to a previous judgment in Renji Lal Damodaran Vs. State Tax Officer, where an identical issue was addressed by the Division Bench of the Court in W.A. No.1640 of 2018. Applying the ratio of that judgment, the court directed the respondent authorities to release the petitioner's goods and vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing a Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due, along with a bond for the value of goods as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules. Therefore, the court disposed of the writ petition with the direction to release the goods and vehicle upon compliance with the specified conditions regarding the Bank Guarantee and bond. This judgment provides a clear resolution to the issues raised by the petitioner regarding the detention of goods and the demanded penalty, ensuring a fair and just outcome based on established legal principles and precedents.
|
