UPGST Act: Court Upholds Tax Order, Grants Interim Relief for Seized Goods

The court upheld the order imposing tax and penalty under Section 129(3) of the UPGST Act, dismissing the appeal and affirming the seizure of goods. The petitioner's request for interim relief was granted, allowing for the release of seized goods upon payment in accordance with Rule 141 of the CGST Rules. The judgment clarifies the procedure for releasing perishable goods and emphasizes compliance with the GST Rules in such cases.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to order imposing tax and penalty under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act, appeal rejection, consideration of interim relief regarding release of seized goods.

Analysis:
The judgment pertains to a petition challenging an order passed by the Assistant Commissioner Mobile Squad under Section 129(3) of the UPGST Act, where tax evasion was found, leading to the imposition of tax and penalty, along with the seizure of the vehicle and goods. The petitioner further contested the appellate order upholding the initial decision. The court acknowledged the gravity of the matter and granted time for the respondent to file a counter affidavit, followed by a rejoinder from the petitioner. The urgency of the case was highlighted by scheduling an immediate listing.

Regarding the interim relief sought by the petitioner, it was argued that the e-way bill generated complied with Rule 138 of the GST Rules and was valid during interception. Emphasizing the perishable nature of the goods, the petitioner invoked Rule 140 of the GST Rules, proposing the release of goods upon providing security. However, the Standing Counsel opposed this stance, citing Rule 141 as applicable for releasing perishable seized goods. After considering the arguments, the court ruled that upon payment in accordance with Rule 141 of the CGST Rules, the authorities must release the goods promptly.

In conclusion, the judgment addresses the challenges to the tax and penalty imposition under the UPGST Act, the rejection of the appeal, and the interim relief sought for the release of seized goods based on conflicting interpretations of the relevant GST Rules. The court's decision provides clarity on the applicable rule for releasing perishable goods and outlines the necessary steps for the petitioner to secure the release of the seized items.

---