9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 59 - HC - GSTRelease of detained goods alongwith the truck - Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 - HELD THAT - The writ applicant availed the benefit of the interm-order passed by this Court and got the vehicle, along with the goods released on payment of the tax amount. The proceedings, as on date, are at the stage of show cause notice, under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017. The proceedings shall go ahead in accordance with law. It shall be open for the writ applicant to point out the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of SYNERGY FERTICHEM PVT. LTD VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT 2019 (12) TMI 1213 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT - It is now for the applicant to make good his case that the show cause notice, issued in GSTMOV- 6, deserves to be discharged. Application disposed off.
Issues:
1. Release of truck and goods detained since 6.7.2019. 2. Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 3. Interpretation of Sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 4. Validity of show cause notice issued under Section 130. 5. Benefit of interim order and release of vehicle and goods upon payment of tax. Analysis: 1. The petitioner sought relief for the release of a truck and goods detained since 6.7.2019. A previous order directed release upon payment of fine. The petitioner availed this benefit and got the vehicle and goods released by paying the tax amount. The proceedings are at the show cause notice stage under Section 130 of the Act, to proceed as per law. 2. The Writ Application under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed to seek a mandamus or appropriate relief for the release of the detained truck and goods. The Court noted the previous order directing release upon payment of fine and the petitioner's compliance with it. 3. The judgment extensively analyzed Sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. It emphasized the need for authorities to closely examine contraventions and intent to evade tax before invoking confiscation under Section 130. The Court highlighted that confiscation is a penal action and should be based on strong grounds, not mere suspicion. 4. The Court discussed the validity of the show cause notice issued under Section 130. It emphasized the importance of authorities providing detailed reasons for invoking confiscation, based on material evidence and good faith. The judgment outlined the necessity for intense application of mind and good faith in such actions. 5. The judgment concluded by stating that it is the applicant's responsibility to justify the discharge of the show cause notice issued in GSTMOV-10. The writ application was disposed of, with the rule made absolute to the extent mentioned. The applicant was directed to support their case regarding the show cause notice. This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the Court's interpretation of relevant legal provisions and the application of principles to the specific case at hand.
|
