Court dismisses writ petition challenging CGST order, advises statutory appeal route. Refrain from releasing goods via bank guarantee.

The court declined to entertain the writ petition challenging the order under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the show cause notice. The court emphasized the availability of the statutory appeal process under Section 107 of the CGST Act to challenge the final order. The petitioner was advised to pursue the legal remedy through the appellate process, with the court refraining from directing the release of goods through a bank guarantee as jurisdiction now lay with the Appellate Authority for further proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
1. Challenge to order under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
2. Writ petition for quashing orders regarding detained and seized goods.
3. Appealability of the final order under Section 129 of the CGST Act.
4. Entertaining a writ petition against a show cause notice.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner challenged the order under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, contending that the goods were imported for a national project and supported by genuine documents. The petitioner's counsel argued against the order, emphasizing the circumstances that led to the petitioner appearing before the assessing officer due to a previous court order. The assessment order had been passed by the Assistant State Tax Officer, prompting the petitioner's counsel to raise objections on various grounds.

2. The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash the orders (Exts.P10 and P11) related to the detention and seizure of goods, along with a show cause notice for assessment. The petitioner's counsel presented this petition at an interim stage, seeking relief from the court against the actions taken by the authorities regarding the detained goods.

3. The Government Pleader informed the court that the matter had progressed to the issuance of a final order under Section 129 of the CGST Act, which is appealable under Section 107 of the same Act. This acknowledgment highlighted the legal avenue available to challenge the final order through the statutory appeal process.

4. The court, considering the progression of the case to the final order stage, declined to entertain the writ petition against the show cause notice. The judge emphasized that the final order was now appealable, indicating that the appropriate course of action for the petitioner was to pursue the available legal remedy through the appellate process. The petitioner was granted liberty to avail the alternate remedy as per the law, with the court refraining from directing the release of goods through a bank guarantee, as the jurisdiction now rested with the Appellate Authority for further proceedings.

---