2023 (1) TMI 234 - HC - GST

Confiscation of goods alongwith conveyance - auction of the goods which are of perishable in nature - HELD THAT - On noticing withdrawal of earlier petition in M/S. MEHTA ENTERPRISE THROUGH ITS PROP. NIRAV VIJAYKUMAR MEHTA VERUS STATE OF GUJARAT 2023 (1) TMI 50 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT for taking legal recourse in accordance with law, this petition is ordinarily not to be entertained, however, a new cause has arisen of receipt of notice of auction and hence, when the approach of respondent is also equitious and balanced, we would avail an opportunity to both the sides with limited protection to the petitioner. Let an appeal be preferred within a period of three days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Once willingness of making the bare minimum deposit as required under the law is shown, for release of goods, the authority concerned shall decide such interim release within a period of one week. Till then, no auction shall take place. Entire appeal shall be decided within a period of eight weeks by the respondent. Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to confiscation of goods and conveyance under GST Act, detention order, release of vehicle and goods, challenge to auction notice, interim relief, appeal process, perishable nature of goods.

Analysis:
The petitioner approached the High Court challenging the confiscation of goods and conveyance under the GST Act, along with the detention order issued. The petitioner sought various reliefs including quashing the impugned orders, release of the vehicle and goods, and challenging the auction notice. The petitioner, a sole proprietorship, had purchased tobacco from different suppliers and was transporting it to another buyer. The vehicle carrying the goods was intercepted on the highway, and both the vehicle and goods were detained by the authorities after following due procedure.

The petitioner had initially filed a petition which was later withdrawn to pursue a different legal recourse. Subsequently, when a new order of confiscation was issued along with an auction notice, the petitioner approached the Court again. During the hearing, the Court considered the arguments presented by both parties. The Assistant Government Pleader highlighted that the petitioner could appeal the assessment order finalized on a specific date.

The petitioner's counsel expressed concerns about the perishable nature of the goods and emphasized the need for a prompt decision by the authorities. The Court acknowledged the previous withdrawal of the petition and noted the new development of the auction notice. Despite the usual practice of not entertaining such petitions, the Court decided to provide limited protection to the petitioner due to the new cause of action.

The Court directed the petitioner to file an appeal within three days, make the required deposit for the release of goods, and instructed the authorities to decide on interim release promptly. The Court also ordered that no auction should take place until the appeal process is completed, and the entire appeal should be resolved within eight weeks. The judgment emphasized that none of the observations should prejudice either party and disposed of the petition accordingly, allowing for direct service on the same day.