9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 34 - HC - GSTRelease of detained goods - section 129(1) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - It appears that one of the grounds mentioned in the order was that the driver or the authorized person was not present, even though the driver had signed the statement at the time of detention. The petitioner orally requested the respondent authorities to release the goods since they were accompanied by eway bill and tax invoice, however, the respondent authorities did not accede to such request. Since the respondent No.2 is refusing to release the goods without payment of tax, penalty as well as redemption fine equal to the value of goods, as mentioned in the impugned notice, the petitioner has approached this court seeking release of the goods in question. Since the present petition is filed only to release the goods being packing materials/aluminum foils, in the light of the averments made in the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein they do not object to the release of the goods in question, the petition deserves to be allowed. Petition allowed.
Issues:
1. Release of goods detained under section 129 of the CGST Act. 2. Validity of the confiscation notice issued under section 130 of the CGST Act. 3. Ownership dispute regarding the goods in transit. Analysis: Issue 1: Release of Detained Goods The petitioner sought the release of goods, specifically packing materials/aluminum foils, detained under section 129 of the CGST Act. The petitioner, engaged in the business of manufacturing and selling packing materials, dispatched goods to a registered trader in Gujarat. However, due to an error in dispatching the goods without a pending order, the goods were detained by the State Tax Officer under section 129. Despite possessing necessary documents like the eway bill and tax invoice, the goods were not released upon oral request. The petitioner did not receive any notice for payment of tax and penalty as required under section 129. The court, considering the narrow controversy involved and the respondents' lack of objection to releasing the goods, allowed the petition for the release of the packing materials/aluminum foils. Issue 2: Validity of Confiscation Notice The respondents issued a notice under section 130 of the CGST Act for the confiscation of the goods, claiming that the place of the recipient did not exist. However, the petitioner disputed this claim and sought the release of the goods. The court quashed and set aside the confiscation notice dated 12.09.2019 to the extent it sought to confiscate the packing materials/aluminum foils. The court directed the respondents to release the said goods immediately. The court clarified that the respondents were permitted to proceed further regarding other goods, specifically pan masala, being transported in the conveyance. Issue 3: Ownership Dispute There was an ownership dispute regarding the goods in transit, particularly the aluminum foils. The purchaser, M/s. Alfa Enterprises, denied purchasing the aluminum foils as per the invoice and eway bill produced by the petitioner. The respondents issued an advertisement in the newspaper to claim ownership of the goods, identified as pan masala, but no one came forward to claim them. The authorities acknowledged that the conveyance possessed the necessary documents for the aluminum foils. The court allowed the petition for the release of the packing materials/aluminum foils based on the respondents' lack of objection to their release. In conclusion, the court allowed the petition, quashed the confiscation notice, and directed the immediate release of the packing materials/aluminum foils. The court permitted the authorities to proceed further regarding the other goods, pan masala, being transported in the conveyance.
|
