2024 (12) TMI 1007 - SCH - GST

Prayer for release of the goods and the vehicles which have been confiscated - HELD THAT - The reliefs have been granted virtually ex-parte without having the benefit of the stand of the State in the matters. Consequently, if the goods were confiscated as well as the vehicles were released, in the absence of there being any proper bank guarantee or other security provided by the respondent(s), the revenues of the State would be at risk inasmuch as in the event the respondent(s) herein are unsuccessful before the High Court, the recoveries would be jeoparadised. The impugned orders aet aside and the matters remanded to the High Court for consideration afresh the interim/final relief sought for by the respondent(s) herein. Since the goods as well as the vehicles have not yet been released as yet, as submitted by the learned senior counsel for the appellant-State, in the event the respondent(s) press for an interim relief, on a reconsideration of the matters, appropriate directions could be issued in accordance with law. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Notice to respondents, delay condonation, release of confiscated goods and vehicles, interim orders, bank guarantee requirement, jeopardy to state revenue, impugned orders in accordance with law, grant of interim reliefs ex-parte, risk to state revenues, setting aside impugned orders, remand to High Court for fresh consideration, disposal of civil appeals.

Analysis:

The Supreme Court addressed multiple issues in this judgment. Firstly, the Court noted the delay condoned and the acceptance of notice by the respondent's counsel. The petitioner argued against the interim orders passed in previous cases, emphasizing the need for proper security like a bank guarantee for releasing confiscated goods and vehicles to safeguard state revenue. The respondent, however, defended the impugned orders, citing compliance with the relevant tax rules. The Court highlighted the risk to state revenue if goods were released without adequate security, emphasizing the importance of proper guarantees.

Moving forward, the Court scrutinized the interim reliefs granted by the High Court, expressing concern over the lack of the State's input in the decisions. The Court observed that releasing goods without sufficient security could jeopardize revenue if the respondent's case failed. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned orders and remanded the matters to the High Court for a fresh review of the relief sought by the respondent. The Court emphasized the need for proper consideration of interim/final relief requests to avoid endangering state revenues.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court disposed of the civil appeals without delving into the merits of the cases. The Court clarified that no observations were made on the substantive issues but focused on the procedural aspects and the safeguarding of state revenue. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper guarantees and the reconsideration of interim relief requests to prevent financial risks to the state. The Court's decision aimed to ensure a fair and lawful process in dealing with the release of confiscated goods and vehicles while protecting state interests.