9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (2) TMI 741 - HC - GSTLevy of penalty and confiscation of goods - section 129(1) of the GST Act - writ applicant availed the benefit of the interim-order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released on payment of the tax amount - HELD THAT - It shall be open for the writ applicant to point out the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of SSYNERGY FERTICHEM PVT. LTD VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT 2019 (12) TMI 1213 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT . It is now for the applicant to make good his case that the show cause notice, issued in Form GST-MOV-10, deserves to be discharged - Application disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to impugned notice under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. Analysis: The petitioner filed a Writ Application under Article 226 seeking to quash an impugned notice dated 03.06.2019 issued under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner requested the court to drop the proceedings initiated under the said section and to release the vehicle along with the consignment of groundnuts. The court noted a previous order where the petitioner was directed to deposit a specific amount for the release of the goods due to the perishable nature of the commodity. The petitioner availed the benefit of the interim order and got the vehicle and goods released on payment of the tax amount. The court emphasized that the proceedings were at the show cause notice stage under Section 130 of the Act, indicating that the case would proceed in accordance with the law. The petitioner was permitted to refer to a recent judgment of the court in a related matter for further arguments. The court referred to the judgment in the case of Synergy Fertichem Pvt.Ltd V/s. State of Gujarat, highlighting key observations made by the court. The judgment focused on the need for authorities to closely examine the contravention of the Act or Rules at the time of detention and seizure of goods. It emphasized that the authorities should determine if there was an intent to evade tax before invoking Section 130 of the Act. The court cautioned against issuing confiscation notices without proper grounds or reasons, stating that such actions rendered Section 129 of the Act ineffective. It clarified that confiscation under Section 130 should be based on a strong case with recorded reasons for belief, and authorities must disclose materials forming the basis of their belief. The judgment stressed the importance of good faith actions and intense application of mind by authorities to avoid unnecessary confiscations. In conclusion, the court disposed of the writ application, making the rule absolute to the extent mentioned. The judgment highlighted the importance of establishing a strong case to discharge the show cause notice issued under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The analysis provided a comprehensive overview of the court's considerations and referenced relevant legal principles from previous judgments to guide the petitioner in presenting their case effectively.
|
