Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : H.R. Enterprises Vs State Of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court)
Appeal Number : S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 5266/2021
Date of Judgement/Order : 01/04/2021
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

H.R. Enterprises Vs State Of Rajasthan (Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur)

High Court observed that The assessees and the authorities under CGST/SGST/IGST are giving their own interpretation of the provisions of the Act relating to Goods in Transit.

All stake holders are treading in the new GST regime with uncertainties as the path is comparatively unfamilier, unmarked and unpaved. The parameters of the authorities’ powers and dealers’ duties/responsibilities/liabilities are yet to be demarcated.

Notice dated 18.03.2021 (Annex.9) is an example of such uncertainty. A perusal of the said notice issued in MOV-07 shows that respondent No.2 has jumped to propose penalty under clause (b) of Section 129(1)(a) on the pretext that as per petitioner No.2, no-one has appeared for the owner of goods and proposed penalty as high as 50% of the value of goods. As against this, he was firstly required to propose penalty under clause (a) of Section 129(1), which would have been equal to the amount of tax. Given that the penalty under clause (a) would have been Rs.1,93,460/-and proposed penalty under clause (b) is Rs.10,74,780/-, in the opinion of this Court, the statutory remedies will be inefficacious. Even, remedy relating to release of goods under Section 129(1)(c) of the Act of 2017 would be illusory.

Having regard to the fact that goods and vehicle are lying stationed/detained with the respondent No.2 since 11.03.2021; inspection and physical verification of the goods including its weighment has already been done. Hence, goods and vehicle are not required, at least for the purpose of inquiry. If they are detained for indefinite period, the condition of stationary truck with weight of 38.120 MT on its tyres, and loss of business of hopeless driver will be irreversible. Besides this, the kind of interim order, which this Court proposes to pass, would not amount to final relief, hence, the judgment cited by learned counsel for the respondents does not apply in the facts of the present case.

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