Court grants liberty to seek release of seized goods in scrap trading dispute

The Court disposed of the writ application filed by a business engaged in scrap trading against the sealing of their warehouse by authorities. The Court granted the applicant liberty to seek release of seized goods under section 76(6) of the Act upon fulfilling certain conditions. The competent authority was directed to review the application for release and make a decision in accordance with the law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Sealing of premises by authorities under section 67 of the Act.
2. Legality of sealing in the absence of sufficient reason.
3. Power of the authorized officer to affix seal under section 76(2) of the Act.
4. Opportunity for the writ applicant to seek release of seized goods under section 76(6) of the Act.

Analysis:
The writ applicant, engaged in the business of scrap, sought relief against the sealing of their warehouse, the principal place of business, by authorities for confiscation of goods. The applicant, registered under the Gujarat Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, argued that the sealing was unjustified as there was no valid reason for it. The applicant's counsel contended that instead of sealing, a restraint order could have been issued to prevent removal of goods or relevant documents from the premises.

In response, the authorities, represented by Ms. Mehta, defended the sealing by citing the power granted to the authorized officer under section 76(2) of the Act. It was highlighted that criminal proceedings had been initiated against the applicant, who was currently in judicial custody. Ms. Mehta asserted that the actions taken were lawful and justified under the provisions of the Act.

After considering the arguments from both sides and examining the materials on record, the Court decided to dispose of the writ application. The Court granted the applicant the liberty to file an application under section 76(6) of the Act for the provisional release of the seized goods upon the execution of a bond and providing security. The competent authority was directed to review such an application and make a decision in accordance with the law. The writ application was thus concluded with this order, allowing for direct service and further legal recourse as per the Act.

---