Unlawful Seizure of Goods Quashed: VAT Act Violation

The court found the seizure of goods under the VAT Act unlawful as it was done before the limitation period expired and based on grounds not listed in the Act. The petitioner was granted interim relief, and the goods were released upon filing an undertaking. The court quashed the seizure order and directed the petitioner to cooperate with the appeal hearing. The petitioner was required to appear before the authority and participate in the proceedings as per the court's ruling.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to order of seizure of goods under VAT Act

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged an order seizing goods under sections 68 & 69 of the Gujarat Value Added Tax Act, 2003, due to alleged default in VAT payment. The petitioner argued that the seizure was based on grounds not listed under the Act and that the assessment order's limitation period had not expired before the seizure. An appeal against the recovery was already pending. The petitioner was granted interim relief, and the goods were released upon filing an undertaking. The petitioner was directed to cooperate with authorities and appear for the appeal hearing.

The respondent contended that the authority had the power to seize goods under sections 44 and 45 of the Act for non-payment of tax. However, considering the appeal filed within the limitation period, the petitioner was asked to appear before the appellate authority.

The court observed that the impugned order was based on the petitioner's tax default, even though it was passed under sections 68 & 69. The assessment order was issued before the appeal was filed within the prescribed 60-day period. The goods had already been released by the court, and the authority seized them before the limitation period under section 73(4) of the Act. Consequently, the court found the seizure unlawful and quashed the order dated 26/5/2015.

The court clarified that the petitioner must adhere to the undertaking filed and cooperate with the appeal hearing. The petitioner was directed to appear before the authority on 13/7/2015 and participate in the proceedings. The rule was made absolute to the specified extent.

---