9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 563X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the business of Arecanut, has prayed for the following reliefs: 34(a) Be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, direction or order under Article 226 of the Constitution quashing and setting aside the detention order dated 25/26.04.2019 passed by respondent no.2 and notice dated 26.04.2019 read with revised notice dated 06.05.2019 issued by respondent no.2; (b) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, be pleased to stay the operation and effect of the impugned detention order dated 25/26.04.2019 and notice dated 26.04.2019 read with revised notice dated 06.05.2019 issued by the respondent no.2 u/s.130 of the Central GST Act, 2017 and to further direct the respondent no.2 to release the goods and the vehicle No.KA14B3156 which has been seized by the Respondent no.2 during the pendency of the writ petition otherwise the petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. (c) That any other and further relief which is just and proper may kindle be granted by this Hon'ble Court. 2. We need not to go into the facts in details, as on date, the controversy is in a very narrow compass.. 3. On 21st May, 2019, the learned Single Judge of this Court pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpared to its real market value i.e. ₹ 210 against ₹ 225 real value of Arecanut. 6. While making good, the principal argument canvassed by the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant that the impugned showcause notice in Form GST MOV10 deserves to be quashed. It is pointed out that there is no any whisper in the entire notice that the alleged contravention was with an intent to evade the payment of tax. 7. Mr. Agrawal, the learned counsel appearing for the writ-applicant vehemently submitted that the most important ingredient for the purpose of confiscation of the goods or the conveyance is the intention on the part of the dealer to evade the payment of tax. According to Mr. Agrawal, the said decision on the part of the authority concerned is missing in the Form GST MOV10. It is submitted that the showcause notice, in such circumstances, could be termed as without jurisdiction. 8. In support of the aforesaid submissions, strictly reliance has been placed by the learned counsel on the recent pronouncement of this Court in the case of Synergy Fertichem Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of Gujarat; Special Civil Application No.4730 of 2019 and allied matters; decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch by itself would be sufficient to take the view that the contravention was with the necessary intent to evade payment of tax. 102. In such circumstances, referred to above, we propose to take the view that in all cases, without any application of mind and without any justifiable grounds or reasons to believe, the authorities may not be justified to straightway issue a notice of confiscation under Section 130 of the Act. For the purpose of issuing a notice of confiscation under Section 130 of the Act at the threshold, i.e,. at the stage of Section 129 of the Act itself, the case has to be of such a nature that on the face of the entire transaction, the authority concerned is convinced that the contravention was with a definite intent to evade payment of tax. We may give one simple example. The driver of the vehicle is in a position to produce all the relevant documents to the satisfaction of the authority concerned as regards payment of tax etc., but unfortunately, he is not able to produce the eway bill , which is also one of the important documents so far as the Act, 2017 is concerned. The authenticity of the delivery challan is also not doubted. In such a situation, it wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the purpose of invoking Section 130 of the Act at the very threshold, the authorities need to make out a very strong case. Merely on suspicion, the authorities may not be justified in invoking Section 130 of the Act straightway. If the authorities are of the view that the case is one of invoking Section 130 of the Act at the very threshold, then they need to record their reasons for such belief in writing, and such reasons recorded in writing should, thereafter, be looked into by the superior authority so that the superior authority can take an appropriate decision whether the case is one of straightway invoking Section 130 of the Act. Any opinion of the authority to be formed is not subject to objective test. The language of Section 130 of the Act leaves no room for the relevance of an official examination as to the sufficiency of the ground on which the authority may act or proceed for the purpose of confiscation at the very threshold. But, at the same time, there must be material based on which alone the authority could form its opinion in good faith that it has become necessary to call upon the owner of the goods as well as the owner of the conveyance to show-cause as to wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
