Detention of goods and levy of tax and penalty -- writ petition dismissed; statutory appeal available as alternative remedy

Writ challenging detention of goods and levy of tax and penalty was dismissed because an efficacious statutory appeal exists; the court treated availability of the alternative remedy as determinative of maintainability and declined to exercise Article 226 jurisdiction. The petitioner's challenge that authorities relied on reasons outside the showcause notice was rejected after review of record; the court found no procedural impropriety or breach of principles of natural justice and upheld the authorities' exercise of power under the relevant tax detention provision. The petitioner was granted liberty to pursue the statutory appeal as the appropriate forum for factual reappraisal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the order passed under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 (valuation and penalty on detained goods) is maintainable in writ jurisdiction when an alternate statutory remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 is available, and whether interference is warranted on grounds of procedural impropriety, natural justice violation, or incorrect valuation.

Analysis: The impugned order under Section 129(3) records detention, weighment results indicating excess quantity, examination of the petitioners documentary evidence, and reasons for rejecting the petitioners explanations. The authorities relied on weighment figures, absence of corroborative loading/weighment documents, irregularities in transporter/driver statements, and non-appearance of payment in bank records to form a conclusion on genuineness and valuation. The order is appealable under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017. The scope of judicial review under Article 226 does not permit reappreciation of primary facts or substitution of factual findings when an efficacious statutory appellate remedy exists. No demonstrable procedural illegality or breach of natural justice was shown that would render the administrative decision amenable to writ interference.

Conclusion: Writ petition dismissed; petitioner may pursue the statutory appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 within the prescribed time and the appellate authority shall decide expeditiously and in accordance with law.

---