M. K. Traders Vs UOI (Gujarat High Court)
Conveyance and the goods came to be detained applying the provisions of Section 130 of the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
Thus, the position as on date is that the confiscation proceedings are in progress. We are only concerned, as on date, with the issue, whether we should order release of the conveyance and the goods (betel nut) pending the confiscation proceedings.
It goes without saying that the betel nut is a perishable commodity. The goods are lying in the open past almost 35 days. By the time the confiscation proceedings are concluded, probably, the goods may get completely destroyed or may suffer extensive damage.
It is brought to our notice that as on date, the writ applicant has deposited the amount of tax to the tune of Rs. 2,29,320/- i.e. 5% under the GST. He has also deposited the amount of penalty to the tune of Rs 2,29,320/-,i.e. equal to amount of tax amount. According to the respondents, the calculation of fine of confiscation of goods would come to Rs 45,86,400/-. It goes without saying that the writ applicant would ultimately be governed by the final orders that may be passed in the confiscation proceedings subject to his right of preferring an appeal against such order of confiscation or availing any other legal remedy before the appropriate forum in accordance with law.
We are of the view that the conveyance and the goods should be released pending the confiscation proceedings, subject to the writ applicant executing a personal bond of Rs 45,86,400/- to the satisfaction of the respondents nos. 2,3 and 4. On executing a personal bond of Rs 45,86,400/-, the respondent shall, forthwith, release the conveyance and the goods, subject to the final outcome of the confiscation proceedings.
FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGEMENT
1. Rule returnable forthwith. Ms. Maithili Mehta, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondents nos. 2,3 and 4.
2. The respondent no. 1, although served with the notice issued by this Court, yet has chosen not to remain present before this Court either in, person or through an advocate and oppose this writ application.
3. By this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs :
” 25(A) To issue a writ of Mandamus and/ or writ of certiorari and or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to release the seized goods along with truck under section 129(1) (a) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 on such terms and conditions which may be deemed fit and proper to this Hon’ble Court and in the interest of the petitioner.
(B) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, to direct the respondents to release the seized goods along with truck provisionally under section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017.
(c) To pass any other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper.
(D) To provide for the costs of this petition.”
4. The case of the writ applicant in his own words, as pleaded in the writ application, is as follows :
“2. The petitioner submits that the petitioner is challenging the action of the respondents of declining to release the goods under section 129(1)(a) of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (for sake of brevity and convenience ” the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017″ shall be referred as “CGST”) which was seized under section 68 of CGST.
3. The petitioner submits that the petitioner is having GSTIN / UNI : 24BSZMP9190B1Z7 and is engaged in the business of trading of Arecanut / Beetlenut. A copy of the petitioner’s registration certificate is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-A. The petitioner submits that the petitioner had placed an order to RM Traders having GSTIN/ UNI ” 32BRVT6514P1ZU having address as SBM 2/157, Chetalayam Pokalamalam, Dist : Wayanad, Kerala 672592 for Arecanut/ Beetlenut. A copy of the RM Trader’s registration certificate is annexed herewith and marked as Annexure-B. The petitioner submits that R M Traders is the proprietorship concern of one Mr. Abdul Ramsheed T.
4. The petitioner submits that RM Traders had supplied Arecanut through Bahubali Transport Co.of Bangalore. The details of goods and requisite documents are as under :
