9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 232X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deration under authenticated documents, it is his duty to establish the same. As he claims to have purchased the iron scrap from an unregistered dealer at Nellore, owes a responsibility to prove the genuineness of the sale transaction. As rightly argued, the authorities can initiate proceedings under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 against the petitioner and conduct enquiry by giving opportunity to establish their case. Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017 speaks about the detention, seizure, and release of goods and conveyances in transit, whereas, Section 130 of CGST Act, 2017 deals with the confiscation of goods and levy of tax, penalty and fine thereof. The harmonious reading of Sections 129 and 130 of CGST Act, 2017, keeping in mind the object ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction, vitiated on account of violation of principles of natural justice and consequently set aside the impugned auction notice issued by Respondent No. 2 dated 02.03.2024 (signed on 16.05.2024) in Form GST MOV-17 and pass such other order or orders. 2. Heard Sri V.Siddharth Reddy, learned counsel for the Petitioner, and Sri P.Shreyas Reddy, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes. 3. As requested by the learned counsel representing both sides, the matter is taken up for hearing for final disposal. 4. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the Respondent Authorities, without following the procedure of detention under Section 129 of CGST Act, 2017, directly invoked Section 130 of CGST Act, 2017 and ordered the confiscat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n fifteen days from the receipt of the notice, why the goods shall not be confiscated. But the very next sentence would reveal that the petitioner is directed to appear before the Deputy Assistant Commissioner on 16.02.2024, at 11.00 a.m., which would indicate that without giving fifteen clear days, the matter is called on 16.02.2024. Hence, there is some force in the contention of the Petitioner that the impugned order passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. 8. Needless to say, in the present case, respondent No. 1 has detained the goods of the petitioner while they were in transit from Nellore to Naidupeta. Respondent No. 1 may initiate proceedings for confiscation under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017, in view of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the Petitioner under Section 129 of CGST/APGST Act, 2017 within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and conduct enquiry by giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner and pass appropriate orders in accordance with governing law and rules. In view of the same, the auction notice impugned in the writ petition is set aside. In the meanwhile, Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 shall release the detained goods in favour of the Petitioner on a deposit of 25% of their value and execute a personal bond for the balance. They shall also release the vehicle bearing No. AP 0 27 X 4645 in favour of the Petitioner on executing a personal security bond for the value of the vehicle as determined by the concerned Road Transport A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
