Back
R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, HARINATH. N
Cluster Enterprises – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2 – Respondent
ORDER :
(per Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Raghunandan Rao)
Both these Writ Petitions arise, essentially, out of the same set of facts and raise similar questions of fact and law. In such circumstances, both these Writ Petitions are disposed of by way of this Common Order.
2. Heard Sri V. Bhaskar Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri V. Siddharth Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax.
3. The petitioners herein are dealers of scrap iron and were transporting scrap iron for sale to a dealer in Telangana State. The vehicles in which this scrap iron was being transported was stopped for verification and inspection on 27.04.2024 by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST)-2, Office of the Regional Vigilance & Enforcement Department, Kadapa. He is arrayed as the 1st respondent in both the Writ Petitions.
4. After verifying the documents available with the driver of the conveyance, the 1st respondent issued a notice in Form GST MOV-10, under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 [for the short “the CGST, Act”], on 01.05.2024 calling upon the petitioners to showcause why the goods under transport and as well
The court established that confiscation under Section 130 requires prior action under Section 129, and adherence to natural justice is essential in such proceedings.
Point of law: The extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, directing for release of the vehicles or goods, during the pendency of the confiscation, can only be sparingly exercised ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the independence of proceedings for detention of goods under Section 129 and confiscation of goods under Section 130 of the CGST/APGST Act, as expl....
Provisional release of goods pending confiscation is not authorized under Section 130 of the CGST Act; legal authority for property deprivation must follow specific statutory provisions.
Point of Law - Section 68 of the GST Act which empowers the authority concerned to intercept the vehicle and the goods. The said provision of Section 68 is required to be reproduced.
Minor discrepancies in transport documentation do not warrant penalties under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, with general penalties appropriately applied instead under Section....
Section 129 forms part of the machinery provisions under the Act to check evasion of tax and a detention can be justified only if there is a contravention of the provisions of the Act in relation to ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
