Tax Penalty Under GST Section 129(3) Challenged Due to Technical Difficulties in Filing Appeal

The HC addressed a challenge to tax and penalty imposed under Section 129(3) of JGST Act where the petitioner faced technical difficulties filing an appeal due to delayed issuance of Form GST DRC-07. Despite claims of natural justice violations, the court declined to examine merits and instead directed the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under Section 107. The court ordered release of the detained vehicle upon furnishing a bond and bank guarantee equivalent to the liability amount, while instructing the petitioner to obtain the necessary GSTIN number from the Deputy Commissioner for filing either an online or manual appeal.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Imposition of tax and penalty under Section 129(3) of the JGST Act.
2. Delay in issuance of summary of order in Form GST DRC-07.
3. Technical difficulties faced by the petitioner in preferring an appeal.
4. Alleged violation of principles of natural justice in the proceedings.
5. Interpretation of Circulars issued by the Ministry of Finance and Commercial Taxes Department.
6. Availability of alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the JGST Act.
7. Granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner challenged the imposition of tax and penalty under Section 129(3) of the JGST Act, contending that the entire proceedings leading to the imposition were concluded hastily on the same day as the detention order was issued, without providing a summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07. The petitioner argued that this violated principles of natural justice and Sections 68 and 129 of the JGST Act, 2017. The petitioner sought relief as the impugned proceedings were deemed unfair due to the lack of opportunity for appeal.

2. The delay in issuing the summary of the order in Form GST DRC-07 caused technical difficulties for the petitioner in preferring an appeal online. The petitioner, as the owner of the truck, faced challenges due to the absence of the GSTIN number and procedural issues arising from the proceedings being conducted against the driver. The State filed a counter affidavit acknowledging the technical obstacles faced by the petitioner.

3. The petitioner raised concerns about the alleged violation of principles of natural justice and the proper procedure to be followed in cases of detention of goods and conveyances in transit. Both parties referred to Circulars issued by the Ministry of Finance and the Commercial Taxes Department, highlighting the requirement for uploading a summary of every order electronically in Form GST DRC-07. The State suggested that the petitioner should avail the alternative remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the JGST Act and provided guidance on obtaining the necessary GSTIN number for appeal.

4. Despite the petitioner's plea of violation of natural justice, the court granted the petitioner liberty to approach the appellate authority against the impugned order passed under Form GST MOV-09. The court directed the petitioner to seek the GSTIN number from the Deputy Commissioner, State Taxes, and instructed the petitioner to prefer an appeal online. If online appeal submission faced technical issues, the petitioner could opt for manual appeal submission before the appellate authority.

5. The court disposed of the writ petition with directions for the petitioner to furnish a bond and bank guarantee equivalent to the liability fastened under Form GST MOV-09 for the release of the vehicle. The court clarified that it did not delve into the merits of the case but focused on providing procedural guidance and relief to the petitioner in navigating the appeal process effectively.

---