Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the seizure of goods and vehicle and the consequential penalty proceedings were liable to be interfered with, and whether release of the goods and vehicle could be directed on deposit of the amount assessed by the seizing authority.
Analysis: The goods were found to be moving from one State to another through Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner was a transporter and not a registered dealer. The Court accepted that the transit declaration downloaded under the VAT regime had no real bearing on the transaction under the GST regime, but also noted the seizing authority's finding that the goods were in excess of the disclosed quantity. In these circumstances, instead of quashing the action in full, the Court considered it appropriate to secure the estimated tax liability for interim release of the seized goods and vehicle.
Conclusion: The petition was not allowed on merits of the seizure, but release of the goods and vehicle was directed on deposit of Rs. 67,010 in cash or by bank draft and on furnishing of an indemnity bond to the extent of the assessed penalty amount.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition resulted in conditional relief to the petitioner by directing release of the seized goods and vehicle against monetary deposit and security, while leaving the seizure and penalty action otherwise intact.