2022 (12) TMI 1230 - HC - GST

Seeking provisional release of seized goods - petitioner submitted that E-way bill can be applied for only after weighment at the weigh bridge - consignment was transported by truck from the Railway yard to a weigh bridge and the interception occurred during such transit - HELD THAT - This writ Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion or view on the same. There is another reason as to why this writ Court refrains itself from expressing any opinion and proceeds to dispose of the writ petition. That other reason is, learned Revenue counsel, on instructions, submits that pursuant to interception on 06.12.2022, a show-cause notice as statutorily required under Section 129(3) of C-G ST Act has been issued to the writ petitioner on 07.12.2022, the writ petitioner has sent a reply on the same day, the third respondent has considered the same and has made an order dated 09.12.2022, which has been placed before this Court. To be noted, copy of the 09.12.2022 proceedings has been handed over by the learned Revenue counsel to the learned counsel for writ petitioner today. If the writ petitioner chooses to do the same in accordance with law, the Authority / forum / Court would consider the same on its own merits and in accordance with law untrammelled by any observation in this order which has been made for the limited purpose of disposal of captioned writ petition. The writ petition fails and the same is dismissed.

Issues Involved:
1. Interception of a consignment of 'Carbon Black Feedstock Oil' during transportation.
2. Impugned proceedings under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
3. Dispute regarding the requirement of producing an E-way bill during transit.
4. Show-cause notice issued and subsequent order passed by the authority.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Interception of Consignment
The main writ petition involved the interception of a consignment of 'Carbon Black Feedstock Oil' during transportation from Mumbai to Chennai. The truck carrying the consignment was intercepted at Tondiarpet, and a statement was recorded from an individual named Deepak. The impugned proceedings under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 were challenged in the writ petition.

Issue 2: Impugned Proceedings
The impugned proceedings referred to the interception of the consignment and the recording of a statement without specific options being scored off or ticked by the authority concerned. The Revenue counsel stated that Deepak was at the wheel during the interception, and proceedings under Section 129 of the CGST Act were initiated. The writ petitioner contested the validity of the impugned proceedings and highlighted discrepancies in the process followed during interception.

Issue 3: Dispute Over E-way Bill Requirement
The dispute also revolved around the requirement of producing an E-way bill during transit. The writ petitioner argued that the E-way bill could only be generated after weighment at the weigh bridge, while the Revenue counsel contended that internal weighing conducted by the petitioner invalidated this argument. The court refrained from expressing an opinion on this factual dispute and proceeded to dispose of the writ petition.

Issue 4: Show-Cause Notice and Order
Following the interception, a show-cause notice was issued to the writ petitioner as mandated by Section 129(3) of the CGST Act. The petitioner responded promptly, and the third respondent issued an order on 09.12.2022 after considering the reply. The court noted that the matter had been concluded within the statutory timeline of seven days, rendering the challenge to the impugned proceedings moot. The court dismissed the writ petition, granting the petitioner the option to challenge the 09.12.2022 order separately if desired.

In conclusion, the High Court dismissed the writ petition and the related Writ Miscellaneous Petition, preserving the rights of the writ petitioner to challenge the subsequent order separately. No costs were awarded in the matter.

← Previous Next →