IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN, JJ.
M/s. Bright Road Logistics – Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana & Ors. – Respondents
CWP-2490 of 2019 (O&M)
Decided On : 09-08-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition filed against gst order. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. seizure of goods backed by findings of tax evasion. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. constitutional provisions regarding gst enforcement examined. (Para 5) |
| 4. arguments challenging the authority of the proper officer. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. legal framework on inspection and detention of goods applied. (Para 11 , 18 , 22) |
| 6. deficiencies in transport documents imply tax evasion. (Para 24 , 30) |
| 7. writ petition dismissed for lack of merit. (Para 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT
Harpreet Kaur Jeewan, J. - The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed impugning the order dated 26.11.2018 (Annexure P-1) passed by the First Appellate Authority, State-GST, Haryana, whereby the order dated 12.06.2018 (Annexure P-34) passed by the Assistant Excise and Taxation Officer (Enforcement)-cum-Proper Officer of State Tax, Gurugram (North), under Section 130 of the Central GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT , 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'GST Act, 2017') read with relevant provisions of the Haryana GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT , 2017 (HGST Act in short) and Integrated GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT , 2017 (IGST Act in short) was upheld.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is engaged in the business of transportation of goods by road and holding GSTIN 29AGSPB7424K2ZW. The appellant's consignment loaded in vehicle No.RJ-14GF-8592 was intercepted and detained by Sh. Rajbir Mahant, Asstt. Excise and Taxation Officer (Enforcement)-cum-Proper Officer of State Tax, Gurugram (North) on dated 20.05.2018 at 11.10 P.M. at Gurugram under Section 68 (3) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 68 (3) of the HGST Act, 2017 and Section 20 of the IGST Act by issuing seizure memo No.0095 Sr. No.47 (Annexure P-18). The vehicle was carrying goods of mixed scrap i.e. copper, alluminium and bead scrap. On demand, the driver-cum-person incharge of the goods produced Invoice Nos.32, 33, 34, 35 and e-way bill Nos.531030092131 and 561030091616 dated 26.04.2018 issued by M/s Hari Om Enterprises, Krishnagiri (Tamilnadu) GSTIN-33GHWPS3181R1Z3 alongwith GR No.164, 165, 166, 167 dated 26.04.2018 issued by M/s Bright Road Logistics, Salem, showing description of goods mixed metal scrap i.e. copper, alluminium and bead scrap.
2.1 The petitioner filed reply dated 23.05.2018 (Annexure P-19) to the said seizure memo. Another show cause notice dated 20.05.2018 (Annexure P-20) was issued to the petitioner for detention of the vehicle which was received on 23.05.2018 and the petitioner filed reply to the said notice on 25.05.2018 (Annexure P-21). Order dated 29.05.2018 (Annexure P-23) was passed under Section 129 (1)(a) of the GST Act, 2017, whereby, the truck and the goods were ordered to be confiscated and further ordered to be released subject to payment of total amount of Rs.35,36,000/- which includes tax as Rs.9,36,000/- and penalty under Section 129 (1)(b) of CGST Act, 2017 as Rs.26,00,000/-.
2.2 The Asstt. Excise and Taxation Officer-cum-Proper Officer, State Tax, Gurugram issued a show cause notice dated 06.06.2018 under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the IGST Act, 2017 for imposition of tax and penalty (Annexure P-32). The appellant filed reply dated 07.06.2018 (Annexure P-33) to the said notice. The Proper Officer of State Tax, Gurugram passed the order dated 12.06.2018 (Annexure P- 34), whereby the goods and conveyances were ordered to be released on payment which was calculated as under:-
2.3 The appellant filed an appeal before the First Appellate Authority under Section 107(2) of GST Act, 2017 (Annexure P-39) against the order dated 12.06.2018. The appellant also filed CWP-16633-2018 with a prayer that no appellate authority was appointed, therefore, the appeal could not be heard. The said petit
The court established that confiscation under Section 130 requires prior action under Section 129, and adherence to natural justice is essential in such proceedings.
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....
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....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.