9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 303X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Rules, is a matter which need to be adjudicated by the 1st respondent before passing an order for payment of tax and penalty as contemplated under Section (3) of Section 129. It will suffice if the appellant is given an opportunity to participate in the adjudication process, if necessary after filing objections with supporting documents to Ext.P7 notice - order directing release of the transit, on furnishing Bank Guarantee is not interfered with - Appeal disposed off. - WA.No.2473 OF 2019 - - - Dated:- 17-12-2019 - THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR APPELLANT: SMT.BLOSSOM MATHEW JUDGEMENT Abdul Rehim, J. The petitioner in W.P.(C) 32848/2019 is the appella ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the transaction in question is not a supply of goods attracting liability of any tax and that it is a permissible transaction contemplated under provisions of the CGST Act. It was specifically contended that, under Rule 55 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017(CG ST Rules, for short), an invoice need not be generated wherever there is transportation of goods for any reasons other than by way of supply. But the learned Single Judge found that, the appellant could not be able to establish that the transaction between the parties was not a sale and that the ownership of the goods was not transferred to the consignee. It was found that the definition of supply contained in Section 7 of the Act is not confined to transactions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... section (1), Ext.P7 notice was issued directing the petitioner to show cause as to why the tax and penalty proposed should not be made payable. An opportunity of personal hearing was also afforded on 26.11.2019. It is at that stage the petitioner had approached this court challenging Exts.P5 and P7 notices. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner/appellant contended that the detention itself is without jurisdiction and authority. We are not persuaded to accept such a contention, because the officer had mentioned sufficient reason in Ext.P5 for detention of the transport. Whether those reasons mentioned in Ext.P5 will amount to a transit made in contravention of the provisions of the CGST Act or the Rules, is a matter which need to be adjud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s; (1) The order directing release of the transit, on furnishing Bank Guarantee is not interfered with. (2) The appellant will file objections to Ext.P7 show cause notice and shall appear for personal hearing before the 1st respondent on any day which will be intimated to the appellant by the 1st respondent. (3) The 1st respondent shall pass an order as contemplated under sub-section (3) of 129, only on taking into consideration of the objections if any raised by the petitioner to the extent that the transit was not in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules. (4) The Bank Guarantee if any furnished for release of the transit shall not be encashed until the expiry of a period of 10 days from the date on which the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
