Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.SARAVANAN
Mahalakshmi Metal Mart – Appellant
Versus
Joint Commissioner of (Appeals) GST and Central Excise, Coimbatore – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner is before this Court against the impugned order passed by the first respondent in Order No.20/2022-GST (SLM) dated 19.04.2022 in Form GST APL-04.
2. I have considered the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.
3. It is noticed that the petitioner has filed this writ petition on 26.09.2022.The petitioner had an alternate remedy to file an Appeal before the GST Appellate Tribunal under Section 112 of the GST enactment. However, the GST Appellate Tribunal was not a reality and it had not been notified. Even as on date, though it has been notified, it has not been fully constituted. Considering the same I shall take up to proceed the writ petition and dispose the same on merits.
4. By the impugned order the petitioners Appeal No.155/2021 dated 30.12.2021 against the Order in Original No.06/2020-2021 dated 24.12.2020 passed by the office of the second respondent has been rejected. The said order in Original No.06/2020-2021 dated 24.12.2020 itself came to be passed in the background of the Show Cause notice issued to the petitioner in serial No. 1/2019/3499 dated 15.11.2019. By the aforesaid order in O
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....
Natural justice requirements necessitate notice to affected parties; however, notice to the driver suffices, supporting reliance on alternative statutory remedies for contesting orders.
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 court established that confiscation under Section 130 requires prior action under Section 129, and adherence to natural justice is essential in such proceedings.
The court emphasized the need for a thorough inquiry into the petitioner's misuse of the provisions of the GST Act and directed the respondent authority to take proper action in accordance with the l....
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 documentation discrepancies do not imply intent to evade tax, and valid transport documents render penalty imposition inappropriate.
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
