9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 644X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onsignment that was in transit was detained even though it accompanied the E-Way Bill as is required under the provisions of the respective GST enactments and the Rules made thereunder. It appears that the respondents have detained the goods on the ground that the supplier, from whom the petitioner has purchased the goods, had wrongly passed on the Input Tax Credit and thereby entailing the petitioner to avail and utilize the same for discharging tax liability on the supplies made by the supplier. 4. The specific case of the petitioner is that the movement of goods by the petitioner is in accordance with the provisions of the respective GST enactments and the Rules made thereunder. 5. If it is the case of the respondents that the supplier ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us, the Bench concluded that ITAT is not a Court but it exercises judicial powers that have the widest amplitude. Thus, the conclusion was that the Tribunal must be held to have power to grant stay and such power was incidental and necessarily to its appellate jurisdiction. The ratio of the aforesaid order would be fully applicable to the present scenario as well. 21. Thus, the petitioners are permitted to file appeals accompanied by applications seeking release of the goods. Upon receipt of such appeals/petitions seeking interim release, the appellate authority shall hear the petitioners and pass orders in regard to the interim applications within a period of one week." 10. It is submitted that the petitioner will have to file appropria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y proceedings will be subject to the final outcome of the appeal. Therefore, to balance the interest of the revenue and the petitioner, I am of the view that there can be a direction to the petitioner to deposit the maximum penalty of 200% of the tax to safeguard the interest of the revenue. 17. The petitioner is directed to pre-deposit 200% of the maximum penalty after adjusting the amount already deposited. In the alternative, the petitioner can be directed to furnish Bank Guarantee in terms of Section 129(c) of the respective GST enactments and the Rules made thereunder. I see no purpose in detaining the goods, if there is already a transaction of sale/supply to a buyer. On furnishing Bank Guarantee for the balance amount of penalty or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
