Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, SANJEET PUROHIT
Korfex Industries Private Limited , Through Its Authorized Signatory Director, Ravi Garg Son Of Dinesh Garg – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Principal Secretary – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's prayer for various writs. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner is a registered dealer under gst. (Para 2) |
| 3. details of the transaction and goods involved. (Para 3) |
| 4. arguments about illegality of mov-02. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 5. respondent's allegations of fraudulent behavior. (Para 7 , 9) |
| 6. company changes and its implications. (Para 8) |
| 7. ongoing investigation related to tax evasion. (Para 10) |
| 8. crucial provisions of the gst act outlined. (Para 11) |
| 9. details on inspection and seizure provisions. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 10. forms for handling seized goods. (Para 17) |
| 11. procedural lapses by the authorities. (Para 18) |
| 12. supplier company’s fraudulent actions detailed. (Para 19) |
| 13. assessment of fraudulent activities and public loss. (Para 20 , 21) |
| 14. doctrine of clean hands in equitable claims. (Para 22 , 23) |
| 15. indictment of scheme designed to evade law. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 16. writ dismissed with costs imposed. (Para 27 , 28 , 29) |
JUDGMENT :
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, CJ.
1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
“I. issuance of a writ, order or direction especially in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the order in form GST- M
The court ruled that equitable relief is denied to parties lacking clean hands, especially where fraudulent practices are evident in tax evasion involving bogus entities.
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 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....
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 ....
Minor deviations in transport routes without intent to evade tax do not warrant harsh penalties; authorities should impose general penalties for trivial lapses in compliance with the Goods and Servic....
Natural justice requirements necessitate notice to affected parties; however, notice to the driver suffices, supporting reliance on alternative statutory remedies for contesting orders.
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....
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.
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
