9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1583X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitioner is on Annexure P/2, a circular issued under Section 68 of the C.G.S.T Act read with Rule 138 of the C.G.S.T Rules, 2017 - HELD THAT:- It is specifically directed, as per Paragraph No. 2 (g), that an order of detention in FORM GST MOV-06 and a notice in FORM GST MOV-07 has to be in accordance with sub-section (3) of Section 129 of the CGST Act. Here, despite the notice having been issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed is of violation of the provision under Section 129 (3) of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (for brevity the Act ). 2. The contention is that the order has not been passed within 7 days of service of notice. Admittedly, the vehicle which was carrying the petitioner s goods were detained by the authority as per Annexure P/3 on 30.03.2024. A physical verification was conducted on the very ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Division Bench of this Court in C.W.J.C No. 7985 of 2024 (Pawan Carrying Corporation vs Commissioner CGST Central Excise Ors). It is submitted that no penalty order could have been passed beyond the limitation period under Section 129 (3) of the Act. 5. The learned Government Advocate on the other hand relies on CWJC No. 4924 of 2023 (M/s Sangam Wires vs the State of Bihar Ors) dated 24.04.2023. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justice. 7. In Pawan Carrying Corporation (supra), though a notice was issued within the time provided in Section 129 (3), the order was passed delayed after about 19 days. 8. The specific contention raised by the petitioner also is on Annexure P/2, a circular issued under Section 68 of the C.G.S.T Act read with Rule 138 of the C.G.S.T Rules, 2017. In that it is specifically directed, as per Parag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
