2022 (11) TMI 676 - HC - GST

Detention of goods - goods detained on the ground that no documents were produced at the time of inspection and the genuineness of the goods in transit and/or documents requires further verification - HELD THAT - In view of statement made by learned AGP Mr. Kathiria prayers made by the petitioner would be satisfied and other prayers would be taken care of by the Appellate Authority while deciding the appeal on merits. Instead of entertaining the petition on merits, the same is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.4 to decide the appeal within a period of two months and preferably on or before 15.11.2022 in accordance with law - the petitioner is entitled to raise all the contentions which are raised in this petition before the Appellate Authority. The petition is disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing of auction notice and release of confiscated goods.
2. Direction to not auction goods until appeal is decided.
3. Timely decision on appeal by the Appellate Authority.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought various reliefs, including quashing an auction notice, release of confiscated goods, and a directive to not auction the goods until the appeal is decided. The petitioner's case involved the supply of Copper Scrap and subsequent detention of the goods during transportation. The respondent issued detention orders under section 129(1) of the GGST Act, leading to a dispute over the valuation of goods and imposition of penalties. The petitioner appealed the decision and made a pre-deposit as required by the law.

2. Despite the pending appeal, the respondent initiated auction proceedings for the confiscated goods, prompting the petitioner to file the present petition. The petitioner argued that the delay in hearing the appeal forced them to seek relief through the court. The Assistant Government Pleader assured that the appeal would be decided within two months, leading the court to dispose of the petition with a direction to decide the appeal within the stipulated time frame. The court emphasized that the petitioner could raise all contentions before the Appellate Authority, clarifying that no opinion on merits was expressed in the disposal.

3. The judgment highlights the importance of timely resolution of appeals and the right of parties to present their case before the appropriate authority. The court's decision to dispose of the petition with a directive for expeditious appeal resolution underscores the principle of procedural fairness and adherence to legal timelines. The case serves as a reminder of the significance of due process in administrative and legal proceedings, ensuring that parties have the opportunity to address grievances and seek redress through established legal channels.