Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Anant Jignesh Shah Proprietor of M/S. Nakoda And Company Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)
Appeal Number : Special Civil Application No. 12712 of 2020
Date of Judgement/Order : 06/11/2020
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Anant Jignesh Shah Proprietor of M/S. Nakoda And Company Vs Union of India (Gujarat High Court)

The issue under consideration is whether show cause notice (SCN) for confiscation of goods or conveyance is justified on mere Suspicion under GST Act?

High Court states that, the ground on which the authority proposes to confiscate the goods and the vehicle is not tenable in law. The show cause notice appears to have been issued on an assumption that the driver of the vehicle might have indulged in the past in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Rules made thereunder. It appears the entire basis for the issue of the show cause notice is conjectures and surmises. The goods and the vehicle can be detained under Section 129 of the Act only if such goods are transported in contravention of the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder. HC specifically inquired with the learned Assistant Government Pleader as to whether any provision of the Act or the Rules could be said to have been contravened with regard to the transaction in question. Assistant Government Pleader, with his usual fairness pointed out that when the goods were in transit and detained, it cannot be said that there was any contravention of the provisions of the Act or the Rules. However, according to Assistant Government Pleader, the authorities have grave suspicion that the driver of the vehicle might have entered Ahmedabad on the same E-way bill and might have succeeded in getting out thereafter without payment of any tax. Thus, the case of the learned Assistant Government Pleader is one of evasion of tax for some transaction which is unknown. The show cause notice under Section 130 of the Act cannot be issued on a mere suspicion. There has to be some prima facie material on the basis of which the authority may arrive at the satisfaction that the goods are liable to be confiscated under Section 130 of the Act. In such circumstances referred to above, we are left with no other option but to quash and set aside the notice in Form GST MOV-10 dated 15th September, 2020.

SCN for Confiscation of Goods or Conveyance on Mere Suspicion Not Justified

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
July 2024
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031