Asgar Ali Vs Union of India (Kerala High Court)
Kerala High Court has ruled that the mere absence of an express reference to the “conveyance” in a confiscation order under Section 130 of the CGST Act does not automatically exclude the vehicle from confiscation, particularly when the show cause notice proposed such action. The court’s decision came in the case of Asgar Ali vs. Union of India, where the petitioner, a truck owner, challenged a confiscation order, arguing that his vehicle was not specifically included in the confiscation directive.
The case originated on October 31, 2021, when Asgar Ali’s truck (RJ 14 GJ 6711) was engaged by M/s. Platinum Trade Link, Palakkad, to transport arecanuts to Delhi, with an E-Way Bill (Ext.P4) and invoice (Ext.P5) generated for the consignment. On November 1, 2021, the truck was intercepted by GST authorities at Pallikkara. During inspection, it was determined that the consignment lacked valid documents. Subsequently, notices (Ext.P6, P7, P8) were issued to the consignor and the petitioner through his driver. A notice of confiscation (Ext.P9) was later issued, proposing the confiscation of both the goods and the conveyance under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017, and requiring them to show cause.
