Case Law Details
Chandimata Iron Vs State of Tripura (Tripura High Court)
Since the order under challenge in this petition is appealable, we permit the petitioner to pursue such appeal for which, we are informed limitation period has yet not expired. However, considering the facts of the case, the goods of the petitioner which are in the nature of TMT Bars, shall be released provisionally on the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax and penalty demand and furnishing a bond for securing the rest of the amount.
Similarly, if the transporter also approaches the competent authority for provisional release of the vehicle and offers bond for the full value of the tax and penalty such vehicle shall be released in favour of the transporter.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER /JUDGEMENT
Petitioner’s goods were initially detained thereafter, seized and now are order to be confiscated. The GST authorities of the State have also demanded tax and penalty for, what they alleged was transportation of goods without valid e-Way bill. The amount of tax plus penalty comes to Rs.2,82,073/-. The competent authority has passed an order to this effect on 08.01.2020. Against such order, statutory appeal lies under the Tripura State Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (‘the Act’ for short).
Case of the petitioner is that the goods were being transported in the course of inter-State sale and that there was no lapse on part of the petitioner or the transporter in carrying valid e-Way bill till the goods were in transit. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would prefer appeal against the said order dated 08.01.2020, however, in terms of Section 129 (2) read with Section 67 (6) of the said Act, on suitable conditions goods may be released.
Learned Additional Government Advocate opposed the petition and relied on the contents of the affidavit-in-reply.
Since the order under challenge in this petition is appealable, we permit the petitioner to pursue such appeal for which, we are informed limitation period has yet not expired. However, considering the facts of the case, the goods of the petitioner which are in the nature of TMT Bars, shall be released provisionally on the petitioner depositing 25% of the disputed tax and penalty demand and furnishing a bond for securing the rest of the amount.
Similarly, if the transporter also approaches the competent authority for provisional release of the vehicle and offers bond for the full value of the tax and penalty such vehicle shall be released in favour of the transporter.
Petition is disposed of.
