9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 726X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall not be given effect to by the authorities. Admittedly, the petitioner himself applied under Section 67(6) of the Act seeking release of the seized goods vide Annex.10, based on which the order dated 11/5/2021 (Annex.15) was issued and as such passing of the order 11/5/2021 by the respondents also cannot be faulted. The order dated 21/5/2021 is modified to the extent that besides the surety bond of the equivalent amount of value of goods by the petitioner, it would be required of the petitioner to furnish security in the form of bank guarantee in terms of Section 67 (6) of the Act and Rule 140 of the Rules for release of the seized goods - the application filed by the respondents under Article 226(3) of the Constitution is allowed. - S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 6019/2021 - - - Dated:- 14-9-2021 - Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Bhansali For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sameer Jain., Mr. Arjun Singh., Mr. Pranav Malik. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Siddharth Ranka., Mr. Kinshuk Jain for DGGI. ORDER The matter comes up on an application filed by the respondents No.1, 3, 4 5 under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India seeking vacation of the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the respondents have passed the order in terms of the relevant provisions, which cannot be faulted and, therefore, the direction to release the goods without insisting for submitting the bank guarantee deserves to be vacated. Reliance was placed on State of U.P. Ors. vs. Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd. : (2020) 5 SCC 811 , M/s. Maa Karni Traders Anr. vs. Union of India Ors. : I.A.(Civil)/977/2021 in WP (C) 1003/2021 passed by Gauhati High Court on 10/6/2021 and JVG Super Cargo Service Ltd. vs. State Tax Officer : S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.2540/2020, decided on 29/6/2020. Learned counsel for the petitioner made vehement submissions with reference to various provisions of the Act that the petitioner is a registered person under Section 25 of the Act and as such in the circumstances of petitioner's case, issues have to be dealt with under Section 35(6) of the Act read with Section 73 or 74 of the Act. Action of the respondents in resorting to Section 67(2) of the Act in seizing the goods is not valid and consequently provisions of Section 67(6) do not apply and, therefore, as the entire action of the respondents in seizing the goods of the petitioner itself is in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and search proceedings carried out without jurisdiction, contrary to the provisions of section 6, by exercising overlapping jurisdiction over DGGI, contrary to the Circular dated 12.06.2017. d) Quash and set aside the statements recorded by bypassing the provisions of Section 70 and in non compliance with the Hon. Supreme Court directions in the judgment of Paramvir Singh Saini v/s Baljit Singh and others in SLP (Criminal) No. 3543 of 2020. e) provide such further and other reliefs, costs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstance of the case. The action of the authorities, apparently, is two fold (i) on account of allegations of one M/s Krishna Enterprises being a bogus firm and supplying fake invoices without supplying the raw material physically and (ii) on account of inspection carried out by the authorities at the principal place of business and additional places of business of the petitioner firm. It is claimed by the respondents, based on the 'Panchnama' dated 31/3/2021 that physical stocks available at the principal place of business/additional places of business did not match with the books of the petitioner dur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessees before the appropriate Authority for complying with the procedure prescribed in Section 67 of the Act read with Rules as applicable for release (including provisional release) of seized goods. ................ 12. There is no reason why any other indulgence need be shown to the assessees, who happen to be the owners of the seized goods. They must take recourse to the mechanism already provided for in the Act and the Rules for release, on a provisional basis, upon execution of a bond and furnishing of a security, in such manner and of such quantum (even upto the total value of goods involved), respectively, as may be prescribed or on payment of applicable taxes, interest and penalty payable, as the case may be, as predicated in Section 67(6) of the Act. In the interim orders passed by the High Court which are subject matter of assail before this Court, the High Court has erroneously extricated the assessees concerned from paying the applicable tax amount in cash, which is contrary to the said provision. 13. In our opinion, therefore, the orders passed by the High Court which are contrary to the stated provisions shall not be given effect to by the auth ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
