Invalid Seizure Proceedings Upheld, Tribunal Establishment Delay Condemned

The court found the seizure proceedings under the UP GST Act to be invalid due to non-compliance with legal requirements. It emphasized the necessity of a constituted Tribunal for appeals under Section 112 of the CGST Act and expressed disappointment over the delay in establishing the Tribunal despite previous orders. The court issued notice to the Union of India and Goods & Service Tax Council regarding non-compliance with Tribunal establishment orders. The petitioner, a registered company, was allowed to release the goods upon furnishing an indemnity bond for the tax value only, facilitating the immediate release of the seized goods and vehicle.

---

---

Issues:
1. Validity of seizure proceedings under UP GST Act.
2. Applicability of appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act.
3. Establishment of the Tribunal under Section 113 of the CGST Act.
4. Non-compliance with previous court orders regarding Tribunal establishment.

Validity of Seizure Proceedings under UP GST Act:
The petitioner argued that the seizure proceedings were invalid and lacked legal authority. The counsel highlighted the necessity of using specific Government Orders and forms during seizure proceedings and vehicle detention. It was contended that since it was an Inter-State transaction, the actions taken under the UP GST Act were deemed illegal. The petitioner explained that the transporter's failure to download part-B of the E-way bill was a human error, rectified promptly after the vehicle's detention. Despite providing all necessary details regarding the goods' destination and purpose, the detaining authority proceeded to seize the goods and issue a notice under Section 129 (3) of the CGST Act.

Applicability of Appeal under Section 112 of the CGST Act:
The petitioner raised concerns about the absence of a constituted Tribunal for appeals under Section 112 of the CGST Act, leading to the challenge of the proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Additional Commissioner (Appeals) affirmed the seizure and penalty orders, prompting the petitioner to file a writ petition. The court emphasized the importance of the Tribunal's establishment to streamline the appeal process and reduce unnecessary court interventions.

Establishment of the Tribunal under Section 113 of the CGST Act:
The court expressed disappointment over the delay in establishing the Tribunal despite previous orders and emphasized the need for a functional Tribunal to address appeals effectively. The court highlighted the procedural provisions under Sections 113, 114, and 117 of the CGST Act related to the Appellate Tribunal's functioning and the subsequent appeal process to the High Court.

Non-compliance with Previous Court Orders Regarding Tribunal Establishment:
The court issued notice to the Union of India and Goods & Service Tax Council to explain the non-compliance with previous court orders regarding the establishment of the Tribunal within two weeks. The court stressed the significance of the Tribunal's establishment to prevent unnecessary court interventions and ensure a proper appellate process. In light of the petitioner being a registered company with the purchaser being a Government of India Enterprise, the court ordered the release of goods on furnishing an indemnity bond for the tax value only, allowing the immediate release of the seized goods and vehicle, and permitting the petitioner to download a fresh E-way bill for onward journey documentation. The court scheduled the next hearing for further proceedings.

---