9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 239 - HC - GSTRelease of seized vehicle alongwith goods - Section130 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - It shall be open for the writ applicant to point out the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of SYNERGY FERTICHEM PVT. LTD VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT 2020 (2) TMI 1159 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT where it was held that The writ applicants availed the benefit of the interim order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released. The proceedings, as on date, are at the stage of show cause notice, under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. It is now for the applicant to make good his case that the show cause notice, issued in Form GSTMOV10, deserves to be discharged - application disposed off.
Issues:
Challenge to detention order and show cause notice under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Analysis: The petitioner sought to quash the detention order and show cause notice issued by the Respondent No.2. A Coordinate Bench of the Court had earlier directed the release of goods and conveyance upon payment of tax. The petitioner availed this interim relief and got the vehicle and goods released. The proceedings were at the show cause notice stage under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The Court referred to a recent judgment regarding the detention and seizure of goods and conveyances. The judgment emphasized the need for authorities to closely examine the contravention of laws and the intent to evade tax before issuing confiscation notices under Section 130. It highlighted that confiscation is a penal action meant to deter tax evasion, and authorities must have strong grounds before invoking Section 130 at the initial stage of detention. The judgment stressed the importance of forming opinions in good faith and ensuring that reasons for belief are recorded in writing. It also mentioned that authorities must disclose materials forming the basis of their belief if challenged, as per a Supreme Court ruling. The Court directed the petitioner to substantiate why the show cause notice should be discharged. Consequently, the writ application was disposed of, with the rule made absolute to the specified extent.
|
