9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (12) TMI 623 - HC - GSTMaintainability of petition - alternative remedy of appeal - Release of detained goods alongwith the truck - it is argued that the interpretation of Section 67(6) is not justified and is contrary to the provisions itself - HELD THAT - Since the petitioner is already availing a statutory alternative remedy, this Court refuses to interfere in the writ petition. The writ petition is dismissed subject to the observation that appellate authority may decide the pending appeal as expeditiously as possible. Sri Amit Manohar states that the next date fixed in the appeal is 14th December, 2020 and in case the appeal is in order and in case the petitioner co-operates, the appeal will be decided on the next date fixed or within a week thereafter.
Issues Involved:
Release of detained goods and truck under GST law based on ownership of goods and payment of tax and penalty. Analysis: The petitioner sought a writ of Mandamus to direct the Assistant Commissioner to release the goods and truck detained under a detention order, upon payment of tax and penalty as per GST laws. The petitioner, as the consigner of the goods, was willing to pay the required amount but was denied release based on ownership issues. The petitioner argued that the interpretation of Section 67(6) was incorrect and contrary to the law. The State respondents relied on a Supreme Court decision which stated that goods cannot be released solely on payment of tax and penalty, requiring additional conditions for provisional release. It was revealed during arguments that the petitioner had already filed an appeal under Section 107 against the order rejecting the release of goods, which was pending. The Court refused to intervene in the writ petition, citing the existence of a statutory alternative remedy through the appeal process. The writ petition was dismissed, with the observation that the appellate authority should decide the appeal promptly. The State counsel mentioned that the appeal was scheduled for a hearing on 14th December, 2020, and assured that a decision would be made swiftly if the petitioner cooperated. The Court directed the parties' counsels to inform the respondents about the order and emphasized the need for a quick resolution of the appeal.
|
