2019 (4) TMI 386 - HC - GST

Imposition of penalty, redemption fine and confiscation under section 130 of CGST Act - Held that - Considering the fact that the petitioner has already deposited tax and penalty under section 129 of the IGST Act, by way of adinterim relief, the respondents are directed to forthwith release Truck No. GJ10 W 7711 along with the goods contained therein. However, the petitioner shall file an undertaking before this court within a week from today to the effect that in case the petitioner, ultimately, does not succeed in the petition, he shall duly cooperate in the further proceedings. Issue Notice returnable on 10th April, 2019.

Summary

Issues:
1. Interpretation of sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Validity of the impugned show cause notice dated 9.3.2019.
3. Compliance with statutory provisions by the respondents.
4. Release of Truck No. GJ10 W 7711 and its goods.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner's advocate highlighted the provisions of sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, emphasizing the procedural requirements for dealing with goods in transit in contravention of the Act. Section 129 mandates the issuance of a notice followed by an order after a hearing, while section 130 can be invoked if there is non-compliance with the section 129 order. The impugned show cause notice sought penalties under section 130 without initiating proceedings under section 129, which was argued to be impermissible.

2. In response to the submissions made, the court issued a notice returnable on 10th April, 2019, directing the respondents to show cause why costs should not be imposed for non-compliance with statutory provisions. The petitioner had already paid the tax and penalty under section 129 of the IGST Act, leading the court to order the immediate release of Truck No. GJ10 W 7711 and its contents as an ad interim relief.

3. As a condition for the release of the truck and goods, the petitioner was instructed to file an undertaking within a week, committing to cooperate in further proceedings if the petition did not succeed. This directive aimed to ensure that the petitioner's compliance with any future legal outcomes was assured. Direct service was permitted in the matter to facilitate timely communication and adherence to the court's orders.

This comprehensive analysis covers the interpretation of relevant legal provisions, the validity of the notice issued, compliance with statutory requirements, and the specific directive regarding the release of the truck and goods, along with the associated conditions for the petitioner.