2020 (2) TMI 1298 - HC - GST

Court Rules Confiscation Unlawful, Directs Compliance & Appeal Process

Sanjaybhai Laxmanbhai Gogara Versus State of Gujarat

The court held that the confiscation of goods and conveyance under Section 130 of the GST Act was impermissible due to the absence of discrepancies. The ... Confiscation of goods or conveyance - levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST Act - Principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- This is a case in which the final order in Form GST-MOV-11 has been passed. In such circumstances, we relegate the writ-applicant to prefer an appeal, against such order, under Section 107 of the Act - Application disposed off. Issues:1. Validity of notice for confiscation of goods and levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST Act2. Legality of the order of confiscation passed by the respondent3. Granting of interim relief for release of goods and conveyance4. Compliance with the order of confiscation passed under Section 130 of the CGST Act5. Direction to prefer an appeal against the final order in Form GST-MOV-11Analysis:Issue 1: Validity of notice for confiscation of goods and levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST ActThe writ-applicant challenged the notice issued by respondent No.2 dated 28.09.2019 for confiscation of goods and conveyance and levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST Act. The Co-ordinate Bench noted that physical verification of the goods was carried out, and no discrepancies were found. Despite this, the respondents proceeded under Section 130 of the CGST Act based on alleged involvement in bogus billing practices. The court observed that in the absence of any discrepancy in the documents and goods, confiscation was impermissible.Issue 2: Legality of the order of confiscation passed by the respondentThe Co-ordinate Bench directed the release of the conveyance bearing a specific number as the petitioner had already paid an amount exceeding the fine in lieu of confiscation. However, the petitioner was required to cooperate with the respondent authorities and provide necessary details. The order highlighted the compliance with the payment and the release of the conveyance, indicating a resolution to the issue of legality concerning the order of confiscation.Issue 3: Granting of interim relief for release of goods and conveyanceThe court granted interim relief directing the respondent to release the goods and conveyance in question, subject to terms and conditions fixed by the court. This interim relief aimed to address the immediate concern of the petitioner regarding the confiscation and release of the goods pending final disposal of the petition.Issue 4: Compliance with the order of confiscation passed under Section 130 of the CGST ActThe court emphasized compliance with the order of confiscation passed under Section 130 of the CGST Act, highlighting the petitioner's fulfillment of the required payment and cooperation with the authorities. The directive to release the conveyance signified adherence to the legal provisions governing confiscation under the CGST Act.Issue 5: Direction to prefer an appeal against the final order in Form GST-MOV-11In the final disposition, the court relegates the writ-applicant to prefer an appeal against the final order in Form GST-MOV-11 under Section 107 of the Act. This direction ensures that the petitioner has the opportunity to challenge the final order through the appropriate legal recourse provided under the GST Act, thereby safeguarding their rights to appeal against adverse decisions.In conclusion, the judgment addresses the various issues raised by the writ-applicant regarding the confiscation of goods and conveyance under the GST Act, providing detailed analysis and directives to ensure compliance, interim relief, and the opportunity for appeal as per the legal framework.