TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Goods Detention Dispute: Tax Documentation Gaps Resolved, Bank Guarantee Protection Secured for Statutory Appeal Process</h1> <h3>M/s SAFA MILL STORES Versus THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, KARUKUTTY, THE STATE TAX OFFICER, KARUKUTTY AND THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAXES, TAX COMPLEX, KOCHI</h3> HC ruled on goods detention case involving tax documentation discrepancies. Petitioner challenged goods detention and sought release through writ ... Release of detained goods - furnishing of bank guarantee for the tax and penalty imposed - Held that:- The appellate authority has already been constituted under Section 107(1) of the CGST/SGST Act; the petitioner may file the statutory appeal in time - the authorities are restrained from invoking the bank guarantee till the petitioner exhausts the statutory remedy or till the appeal gets barred by limitation - petition disposed off. Issues:1. Detention of goods due to incorrect destination point reflected in documents.2. Petitioner's filing of WPC for release of goods and completion of adjudication.3. Apprehension of bank guarantee encashment before filing statutory appeal.4. Submission by the Government Pleader regarding the constitution of appellate authority under CGST/SGST Act.Issue 1: Detention of goods due to incorrect destination point:The petitioner, a partnership firm, transported goods from Bombay to Perumbavoor, but faced detention when trying to unload at Malamury due to discrepancies in the destination point reflected in the documents. This led to suspicions of tax evasion, resulting in the authorities detaining the goods and demanding penalty and tax.Issue 2: Filing of WPC for release of goods and completion of adjudication:Aggrieved by the detention of goods, the petitioner filed WPC No.10256 of 2018 seeking the release of goods and expeditious completion of adjudication. Subsequently, in compliance with the judgment, the petitioner provided a bank guarantee for the imposed tax and penalty to secure the release of the goods.Issue 3: Apprehension of bank guarantee encashment before filing statutory appeal:Following the release of goods, the primary authority concluded the adjudication and issued an order (Ext.P5). The petitioner expressed concerns that the bank guarantee might be encashed by the authorities before filing a statutory appeal within the specified time limit.Issue 4: Submission by the Government Pleader on appellate authority under CGST/SGST Act:The Government Pleader informed that the appellate authority had been established under Section 107(1) of the CGST/SGST Act, allowing the petitioner to file a statutory appeal within the prescribed timeframe. Consequently, the Court restrained the authorities from invoking the bank guarantee mentioned in Ext.P5 until the petitioner exhausts the statutory remedy or the appeal period lapses.In conclusion, the Court disposed of the writ petition with the mentioned observations, providing relief to the petitioner concerning the bank guarantee and ensuring the statutory appeal process could be pursued without hindrance.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
