2019 (11) TMI 880 - HC - GST

Waiver of the bar of alternative remedy - detention of goods alongwith vehicle - it was alleged that neither there was any genuine transport agency nor there was any genuine buyer disclosed in the documents found accompanying the goods - HELD THAT - While the writ petition is being provisionally entertained because of non constitution of Tribunal, insofar as interim relief is concerned, it is provided that the order of confiscation of the truck, shall remain in abeyance, subject to the petitioner depositing with the respondent no.3, an amount equal to tax on the goods found loaded on the truck within two weeks from today. List on 16.10.2019 alongiwth Writ Tax No. 942 of 2018.

Summary

Issues:
1. Petitioner's alleged lack of involvement in a transaction.
2. Claim for waiver of alternative remedy.
3. Provisional entertainment of the writ petition due to the non-constitution of the Tribunal.
4. Interim relief regarding the confiscation of the truck.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner, represented by counsel, argued that they were merely the owner of the truck and were not directly involved in the disputed transaction. The petitioner asserted that the revenue's claim of the transaction being bogus lacked evidence of a genuine transport agency or buyer. This argument forms the basis of the challenge against the order of the first appeal authority.

2. The writ petition sought waiver of the bar of alternative remedy as the Tribunal, the usual forum for appeals, had not been constituted at the time of filing. This request for waiver was crucial for the petitioner's case to proceed directly in the High Court.

3. Due to the absence of the Tribunal, the High Court provisionally entertained the writ petition. However, the interim relief granted was specific to the truck's confiscation. The court ordered that the confiscation of the truck would be put on hold, provided the petitioner deposited an amount equivalent to the tax on the goods loaded on the truck within two weeks. This deposit was to be made to the relevant authority and was subject to the final decision on the writ petition.

4. The learned Standing Counsel was given two weeks to file a counter affidavit in response to the petitioner's claims. The case was scheduled for the next hearing on a specified date, along with another related matter. This procedural step ensured both parties had the opportunity to present their arguments comprehensively before the court.