Scrap Transporter Wins Partial Relief: Recovers Goods by Paying Penalty and Furnishing Bond Under CGST Regulations

HC granted partial relief in tax confiscation case involving scrap transportation. Court directed conditional release of goods and vehicle upon depositing penalty (Rs. 2,94,920) and furnishing bond for fine amount (Rs. 16,38,448). Interim order aligned with previous case precedent, allowing petitioner to retrieve confiscated assets after meeting specified financial conditions under CGST Act, 2017.

---

---

Issues:
1. Petition to set aside notice and order of confiscation
2. Interplay of Section 129 and Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017
3. Prayer for interim relief regarding release of goods and vehicle

Analysis:

The petitioner sought to set aside a notice dated 15.10.2022 and an order of confiscation dated 12.11.2022 concerning the confiscation and detention of goods and a vehicle. The petitioner, engaged in the scrap business, had sold copper scrap to a company and while transporting it, the goods and vehicle were confiscated by authorities, leading to penalty and fine demands. The key issue in this petition revolved around the interpretation and application of Section 129 and Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the powers conferred under these provisions.

A related case, Special Civil Application No. 22601 of 2022, dealing with a similar point, was also mentioned in the judgment and was scheduled for a hearing on 9.01.2023. The court directed that the prayer for interim relief, seeking the release of the goods and vehicle, should be considered in line with the conditions imposed in a previous order dated 25.1.2022 in Special Civil Application No. 22601 of 2022.

The impugned order indicated a penalty amount of Rs. 2,94,920/- along with demands for a fine and other charges totaling Rs. 16,38,448/-. As a form of interim relief, the court directed the respondents to release the confiscated goods and conveyance of the petitioner upon the petitioner meeting specific conditions. These conditions included depositing the penalty amount, the fine amount in lieu of confiscation, and furnishing a bond towards the fine amount. Once the petitioner complied with these conditions, the authorities were instructed to release the goods and conveyance.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the issues raised by the petitioner regarding the confiscation and detention of goods and a vehicle, the legal provisions under the CGST Act, and the granting of interim relief subject to specific conditions to secure the release of the confiscated items.

---