Taxpayer Wins Interim Relief: Perishable Goods Release Approved with Security Deposit and Conditions

HC dismissed Revenue's appeal against interim relief for release of perishable arecanut goods. Court upheld Single Judge's order, allowing goods release upon deposit, bond, and additional property security within specified timeframes. All substantive contentions in original writ petition remain open for future adjudication.

---

---

Issues involved: Appeal against interim relief order directing release of confiscated goods, consideration of perishable nature of goods, requirement of deposit and bond, additional security offered by respondent.

The High Court of Karnataka heard an intra Court appeal by the Revenue challenging an order granting interim relief in a writ petition. The respondent sought release of confiscated goods under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and other relief, citing that the goods were perishable arecanut. The learned Single Judge directed the release of goods upon certain conditions, including a deposit and bond requirement. The Judge noted the perishable nature of the goods and the delay in making arrangements post-confiscation. The respondent offered additional security in the form of immovable property. The Court found no illegality in the Judge's decision and upheld the release of goods, without interference. The Court clarified that all contentions in the writ petition remain open, and the respondent must provide security within two weeks. Upon providing security, the goods are to be released within one week. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

In summary, the judgment addressed the appeal against an interim relief order for releasing confiscated goods, considering the perishable nature of the goods, the deposit and bond requirements, and the additional security offered by the respondent. The Court upheld the decision of the Single Judge, finding no illegality in granting the release of goods under specified conditions.

---