9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (3) TMI 42 - HC - GSTRelease of conveyance alongwith the goods - in the E-way bill which is one of the essential document to be carried otherwise by the conveyance, Part-B was not updated - HELD THAT - When the interception was made on 18.01.2022, it was found by the respondents that, Part-B of the E-way bill was not updated. However, it is the case of the petitioner that, on 18.01.2022 at 10.45 a.m, a corrected E-way bill was generated, where Part-B also had been updated with necessary details including the vehicle number - it is the case of the petitioner that, if a date is given, particularly on that date, the petitioner would appear to give his show cause with documents and thereafter, let the adjudication go on and be completed at the earliest. However, before such completion of adjudication proceedings since the goods have been detained from 18.01.2022 and the goods is chemical component, the same may be directed to be released, of course with some conditions. Whether the Part-B updation admittedly was not available on the date of interception, subsequently has been updated? - HELD THAT - It is a matter of merit to be decided by the adjudicating authority, for which show cause notice alredy been issued. Insofar as the said show cause notice is concerned, let there be a specific date to be specified by the respondents Revenue and communicate the same immediately to the petitioner, on that date, it is open to the petitioner to appear before the respondents and to give show cause with his documents. Thereafter the respondents can decide the same by way of adjudication and pass final orders - insofar as the releasing of the goods are concerned, during the pendency of the adjudication proceedings, this Court feel that, the goods in question, being chemicals, can be directed to be released by way of provisional release, of course with certain condition. The condition being the petitioner shall execute a Bank guarantee for the equal sum of the tax due / tax demanded by the Revenue and on receipt of such Bank guarantee, the goods in question can be released by the respondents. There shall be a direction to the respondents to give a specific date for personal hearing to the petitioner and the same shall be intimated to the petitioner immediately and on receipt of the same, the petitioner shall appear on the date without fail and give his defence with documents. Thereafter, it is open to the Revenue to complete the adjudication and pass a final order as early as possible - Petition disposed off.
Issues:
- Detention of goods due to incomplete E-way bill - Challenge to the show cause notice - Lack of specific date for personal hearing - Request for provisional release of goods Detention of Goods due to Incomplete E-way Bill: The petitioner's goods, chemicals carried by a conveyance, were detained by the respondents on 18.01.2022 due to an incomplete E-way bill. The Part-B of the E-way bill, a crucial document, was not updated initially. However, the petitioner later rectified this by generating an updated E-way bill on 18.01.2022. The detention of the vehicle and subsequent issuance of a show cause notice on 20.01.2022 form the basis of the challenge in the writ petition. Challenge to the Show Cause Notice: The petitioner, through their counsel, argued that despite being prepared to respond to the show cause notice within the stipulated 7-day period, the notice lacked a specific date for personal hearing. The absence of a designated date for appearance was highlighted as a crucial deficiency, potentially hindering the petitioner's ability to present their case effectively before the respondents. Lack of Specific Date for Personal Hearing: The petitioner contended that the show cause notice, while providing a deadline for response, failed to specify a date for the petitioner to appear before the authorities. This ambiguity regarding the hearing date was raised as a procedural flaw, with the petitioner emphasizing the importance of a clear timeline for facilitating their defense and document submission. Request for Provisional Release of Goods: Considering the prolonged detention of the goods since 18.01.2022 and the nature of the detained chemicals, the petitioner's counsel sought the provisional release of the goods under certain conditions. It was proposed that the goods could be released upon the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee equal to the tax amount demanded by the Revenue, allowing for the goods' release pending the completion of adjudication proceedings. The Court, after considering the arguments from both sides, directed the respondents to provide a specific date for the petitioner's personal hearing, ensuring clarity and procedural fairness. Additionally, the Court ordered the provisional release of the goods upon the petitioner providing a bank guarantee equivalent to the tax amount demanded by the Revenue. This provisional release was subject to the condition that the final adjudication and imposition of taxes or penalties by the authorities would not be prejudiced by the goods' release. The writ petition was disposed of with these directives, emphasizing the importance of procedural regularity and fairness in the adjudication process.
|
