TaxTMI Login
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%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the challenge to the order passed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was liable to be entertained after a belated approach. (ii) Whether the summary uploaded in FORM GST DRC07 could be interfered with, or whether the proper course was rectification or withdrawal on proof of payment.
Issue (i): Whether the challenge to the order passed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was liable to be entertained after a belated approach.
Analysis: Section 129 provides for detention or seizure of goods in transit, issuance of notice specifying tax and penalty, and an order for payment. Sub-section (5) contains a deeming fiction that, on payment of the amount referred to in sub-section (1), all proceedings in respect of the notice under sub-section (3) stand concluded. The challenge to the order was raised after considerable delay, and the writ court treated the attack on the detention order as belated in the light of the statutory scheme and the petitioner's own assertion of payment.
Conclusion: The challenge to the order under Section 129(3) was not entertained and was barred by laches.
Issue (ii): Whether the summary uploaded in FORM GST DRC07 could be interfered with, or whether the proper course was rectification or withdrawal on proof of payment.
Analysis: Rule 142(5), (6) and (7) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Rules, 2017 provide for uploading a summary of the order in FORM GST DRC07, treating it as notice for recovery, and uploading a rectification or withdrawal summary in FORM GST DRC08 where the order is rectified or withdrawn. The court treated the DRC07 upload as a recovery-related summary and indicated that, if the amount due had actually been paid, the petitioner could approach the authority with proof and seek rectification or withdrawal in accordance with the statutory mechanism.
Conclusion: No interference was warranted with the DRC07 summary, and the petitioner was relegated to the statutory remedy of rectification or withdrawal on proof of payment.
Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed, and the impugned recovery summary was left to be dealt with through the statutory rectification process if payment had in fact been made.
Ratio Decidendi: A belated constitutional challenge to a completed detention and demand order under the GST transit provisions may be refused on laches, and the corresponding electronic recovery summary is to be corrected through the prescribed rectification mechanism rather than by direct quashing where statutory payment-compliance issues remain.
TaxTMI 
