TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Seizure of Areca Nuts and Vehicle Under CGST Act Sections 129 & 130 Challenged After Appeal Dismissed</h1> <h3>M/s MK Enterprises Versus State of Gujarat</h3> The HC considered a challenge to an appellate order under Section 107(11) of CGST Act involving detention and seizure of areca nuts and a vehicle under ... Seeking release of goods alongwith the vehicle (without demanding any security) - final order challenged by way of an appeal under Section-107 of the Act - Section 129 and Section 130 of the GST Acts - HELD THAT:- We are inclined to pass an interim order so far as the vehicle is concerned. It appears that the total liability of the writ-applicant no.2 as the owner of the conveyance has been determined to the tune of ₹ 1,94,012/- - If the writ-applicant deposits the amount of ₹ 1,94,012/- [Rupees One Lakh Ninety Four Thousand Twelve Only] with the authority concerned, then his truck shall immediately be released and handed over to him. Rule returnable on 13.06.2022. Issues:1. Challenge to Appellate Order under Section 107(11) of CGST Act, 20172. Detention and Seizure of Goods and Vehicle under Sections 129 and 130 of GST Acts3. Request for Certiorari, Mandamus, and Other Reliefs4. Ownership of Goods and Conveyance5. Show-Cause Notice and Final Order under GST MOV-10 and GST MOV-116. Appeal Dismissal and Subsequent Writ-Application7. Interim Order for Vehicle Release upon Deposit of Determined LiabilityAnalysis:1. The writ-application challenges the Appellate Order passed under Section 107(11) of the CGST Act, 2017, seeking Certiorari to quash the order. Additionally, the petition requests Mandamus to direct the release of goods and vehicle without demanding security. The writ-applicants also seek other writs, orders, or directions deemed fit by the Court, along with the award of costs.2. The ownership of the goods, identified as Areca Nuts, lies with writ-applicant no.1, while the conveyance belongs to writ-applicant no.2. The goods were intended for M/s. Royal Traders in Ahmedabad, with the purchaser set to receive them. However, the GST authorities seized the conveyance and goods during transit, issuing a show-cause notice in Form GST MOV-10 for potential confiscation. The final order in Form GST MOV-11, resulting from the appeal under Section-107, upheld the seizure.3. The writ-applicants approach the Court due to the dismissal of the appeal challenging the final order. The matter is scheduled for a return on 13.06.2022, with an interim order issued concerning the vehicle. The Court directs the release of the truck upon the deposit of determined liability of &8377; 1,94,012 by writ-applicant no.2. The legality and validity of the appellate order will be scrutinized during the final hearing.This detailed analysis covers the various issues raised in the legal judgment, outlining the challenges faced by the writ-applicants regarding the detention and seizure of goods and the subsequent legal proceedings under the GST Acts.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
