9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (2) TMI 508 - HC - GSTSeeking release of seized lorry vehicle - procedure under statutes contemplated under law not followed - violation of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT - The present writ petition stands disposed of in similar terms to order dated 30.12.2021 passed in W.P.No.29999 of 2021 2022 (2) TMI 126 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT , where it was held that the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to get the proceeding which has already been initiated by the authorities taken to its logical conclusion, besides praying before the authorities concerned for provisional release of the vehicle, which shall be considered by the authorities concerned in accordance with law expeditiously. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
Petition seeking a writ of mandamus for the release of a seized vehicle without following due procedure under statutes. Analysis: The petitioner sought relief through a writ petition, challenging the seizure of a lorry vehicle by the 2nd respondent without following proper legal procedures. The petitioner claimed the seizure was illegal, arbitrary, and against the principles of natural justice, violating constitutional articles 19 and 21. The petitioner requested the release of the vehicle and appropriate directions to the 3rd respondent. The counsel for the petitioner referred to a previous case disposed of similarly and requested a comparable resolution for the current petition, which was agreed upon by the respondents' counsel. The Court disposed of the present writ petition in line with the order dated 30.12.2021 from a previous case. The order reproduced highlighted the detention of the vehicle due to a lack of documentation during a physical verification stop. The petitioner, as the owner of the truck hired for transportation, argued that only the goods, not the vehicle, should be subject to detention. The Government Pleader contended that the Andhra Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, allows for the detention and release of goods and conveyances in transit without distinction. The authorities detained the vehicle due to the absence of documents related to taxable granite being transported, indicating potential tax evasion. The Government Pleader cited the A.P.G.S.T. Act's provisions and emphasized the notice issued to the concerned person, providing an opportunity to show cause and appear within a specified timeframe. The counsel argued that the petitioner should follow the Act's procedures, and being a mere transporter was not a relevant consideration. Referring to a Supreme Court judgment, the counsel stressed that writ petitions challenging seizures should be directed to the appropriate authority for compliance with prescribed procedures. The Court, after considering the submissions and Section 129(2) of the A.P.G.S.T. Act, declined to interfere, emphasizing the need to conclude the initiated proceedings. The petitioner was granted liberty to pursue the ongoing proceedings and request provisional release of the vehicle, to be considered by the authorities promptly. The Court's decision was based on the legal provisions and the need to follow due process under the A.P.G.S.T. Act, emphasizing the importance of completing the initiated proceedings. The judgment highlighted the distinction between goods and conveyances in transit and the necessity for compliance with statutory procedures to address issues related to seizures effectively.
|
