9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... writ petition, establishing that the vehicles bearing both the registration numbers belonged to the petitioner. The tax authority in the order passed specifically pointed out that this would further the case of evasion and if the vehicles were with two different operators probably the recording of the number in the e-way bill was a bonafide mistake - the merits of the case need no consideration, especially when the contention is of bar by virtue of limitation. Be that as it may, even if the detention is stated to be on 28.12.2023, the notice was only issued on 05.1.2024, after the seven day period provided in Section 129(3) CGST Act. Likewise when the petitioner had been informed at the time of verification, if the petitioner had sought fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 28.12.2023 is the order of detention. Annexure-P/3 is the notice dated 05.01.2024 issued under section 129(3) of the CGST Act. The order passed is produced at Annexure-P/4 dated 15.01.2024. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. D.V. Pathy, points out that the interception of the vehicle was made on 22.12.2023, and it cannot at all be said that the detention was made only on 28.12.2023 when Annexure-P/2 was issued and Annexure-P/3 notice was issued on 05.01.2024, beyond the seven days period provided under section 129 (3) of the CGST Act, going by both the date of interception and the date of alleged detention. The order passed on 15.01.2024 is also beyond the prescribed seven days period from the date of service of notice. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned by the tax authority there was no reason to wait for six days before carrying out the inspection of the goods. The defect noticed was also of two figures in the vehicle number differing from that recorded in the e-way bills; clearly covered by Annexure-P/5 circular. 6. Annexure-P/1 is series of e-way bills which shows the transport to be in vehicle no. UP78 CT 9645. On detention the transport was found to be made in a vehicle having no. UP78 CT 9650. The petitioner produced documents, as stated in the writ petition, establishing that the vehicles bearing both the registration numbers belonged to the petitioner. The tax authority in the order passed specifically pointed out that this would further the case of evasion and if the vehicles ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
