HC orders reexamination of tax evasion under Sections 129 and 130 of CGST/KGST Act; confiscation stay granted

The HC directed the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to reexamine whether the petitioner, as the registered vehicle owner, connived with the transporter to evade tax under Sections 129 or 130 of the CGST/KGST Act. The confiscation order dated 17.04.2021 is stayed pending this inquiry. The petitioner must be given an opportunity to respond to the material relied upon, including any deliberate withholding of information. The petitioner is required to appear before the authority on 13.03.2023 for further proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge to confiscation order under Section 130 of GST Acts and Sections 129 and 130 of KGST/CGST Act.

Analysis:

The petitioner, the owner of a vehicle, challenged a confiscation order under Section 130 of the GST Acts and Sections 129 and 130 of the KGST/CGST Act. The petitioner's counsel clarified that the challenge was not to the statutory provisions but to the initiation of proceedings and the confiscation order itself. The petitioner contended that there was no connivance with the transporter in tax evasion, thus the vehicle should not be confiscated.

The petitioner received a notice alleging connivance with the transporter to avoid tax, followed by a Revised Show Cause Notice. The petitioner responded, denying guilt of tax evasion and requesting the release of the vehicle. An application for rectification was filed, emphasizing the lack of connivance due to strict policy adherence regarding documentation for hired transporters. However, this application was not considered by the authorities.

The Additional Government Advocate argued that the petitioner's affidavit merely stating ownership of the vehicle was insufficient to prove the absence of connivance. The court considered the need for a further inquiry to determine connivance, especially in light of the petitioner's claims and the possibility of deliberate information withholding. The court directed the authorities to reexamine the question of connivance, allowing the petitioner an opportunity to respond to any material against them.

Ultimately, the court disposed of the petition, subjecting the confiscation order to the outcome of further inquiry by the authorities regarding the petitioner's alleged connivance in tax evasion. The petitioner was instructed to appear before the authorities for this purpose, providing all necessary materials to support their case. The authorities were directed to consider all circumstances and deliberate attempts to withhold information while reexamining the question of connivance.

---