Back
B M SHYAM PRASAD
Nandish – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka – Respondent
ORDER :
B M Shyam Prasad, J.
The petitioner, whose vehicle bearing registration No.KA-01-AA-3882 is confiscated under the provisions of Section 130 of the KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT , 2007 [for short, 'KGST Act'], has called such order, which is dated 19.12.2020, in question while also seeking, as an alternative prayer, a direction to the third respondent to consider the rectification application filed under Section 161 of the KGST Act and for release of the vehicle.
2. Sri. Govindaraya Kamath, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while arguing in support of the petition, submits that the petitioner has filed the rectification application dated 18.11.2022 essentially on the ground that there is error apparent on the face of the record as contemplated under Section 161 of the KGST Act because the confiscation of the vehicle is notwithstanding the confiscation of goods. In similar circumstances where the owners of the confiscated vehicle have approached this Court contending inter alia that they are not in connivance with the transporter and as such, their vehicle cannot be confiscated, this Court has granted liberty to the owners to file affidavit with directions to th
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.
The court held that evidence must sufficiently establish vehicle involvement in offences, and the claimant must prove no knowledge or participation in illegal activities for release from confiscation....
The court held that failure to comply with statutory requirements for notice and opportunity to contest confiscation renders the order invalid, violating principles of natural justice.
The court can allow the release of a seized vehicle on conditions despite ongoing confiscation proceedings if initial proceedings were not timely initiated.
Confiscation of a vehicle under the Odisha Excise Act requires evidence of its involvement in an offence, and procedural fairness must be upheld, allowing the petitioner an opportunity to prove lack ....
Confiscation under S.47-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act mandates notice and hearing, failure of which invalidates the seizure.
The court directed the refund of wrongly deposited penalties to facilitate the lawful release of confiscated goods and conveyance, clarifying the responsibilities under GST regulations.
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
