2019 (12) TMI 1046 - HC - GST

Seizure and detention of a consignment of goods - reason for detention is stated to be that the consignee, the petitioner herein, was a return defaulter for the last five months - HELD THAT - There are force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that in terms of Section 129 of the CGST Act, the reason shown by the respondents in Ext.P3 detention notice is not one that can justify a detention - the respondents are directed to release the consignment covered by Ext.P3 notice to the petitioner forthwith on the petitioner producing a copy of of this judgment before the respondents.

Summary

Issues involved: Unlawful seizure and detention of goods under Section 129 of the CGST Act.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged the alleged unlawful seizure and detention of goods by the 1st respondent, citing a detention notice issued due to the petitioner being a return defaulter for the last five months. The petitioner argued that as per Section 129 of the CGST Act, the reason provided in the detention notice was not a valid ground for detaining goods in transit. After hearing both parties, the court found merit in the petitioner's contention. The court held that the reason given in the detention notice was not justifiable under Section 129 of the CGST Act. Consequently, the court quashed the detention notice and directed the respondents to release the consignment to the petitioner upon the petitioner presenting a copy of the judgment.