TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (10) TMI 1383
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and illegal; C. This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd Respondent authority to forthwith release goods along with truck number GJ-10-TX-6465; D. Without prejudice to the above and in the alternative this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 2nd Respondent authority to forthwith provisionally release of goods along with truck number GJ-10-TX6465; E. Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the 2nd Respondent authority to forthwith release goods along with truck number GJ-10-TX-6465 and further proceedings pursuant to impugned confiscation notice (annexed at Annexure B) may please be stayed. F. Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer E may kindly be granted; G. Such further relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your petitioners shall forever pray. 2. Brief facts of the present ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....very same day the transporter of the vehicle produced the invoices and e-way bills. The physical verification report was issued by the State Tax Officer in Form of MOV 4, thereafter, an order of detention of goods was passed by the said officer under Section 129 of GST Act in Form of GST MOV 6. 3.1 The main contention in this affidavit is that the transactions of buyer i.e. Mitesh Enterprise, Jamnagar especially for assessment year 2020-2021 wrongly availed input tax credit by producing fake bills in transactions and, therefore, the MOV 10 has been issued on 06.09.2021 under Section 130 of the GST Act. It is alleged that the claim of third party which reveals evasion of tax resulting into wrongful availment of input tax credit. 4. We have heard Mr.Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioner and Ms.Maithili Mehta, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent - State. 5. Mr.Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioner has, while relying upon the decision in the case of Insha Trading Company Vs. State of Gujarat, [2019] 71 GSTR 337 (Guj), urged that there was no authority with the respondents to seize the vehicles and the goods and there was no discrepancy in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evying tax and penalty and order of confiscation having been imposed by the authority.. The findings and observations of the said decision are as under:- 7.1 The facts have been noted hereinabove. The conveyance in question was transporting the goods being brass electrical parts from Jamnagar to Delhi. The consignor, viz. the petitioner, and the consignee are duly registered under the relevant GST Acts. On 14.01.2019, when the conveyance came to be intercepted, the driver of the conveyance had duly produced the e-way bill as well as the invoice in connection with the goods that were transported. On behalf of the respondents, nothing has been pointed out to show that there was any discrepancy in the e-way bill or the tax invoice. Under the circumstances, in the light of the instructions issued by the Board in the Circular dated 13.04.2018, since, upon verification of the documents no discrepancies were found, the conveyance was required to be allowed to move further. However, in case the third respondent desired to carry out physical verification of conveyance, goods and the documents, it was still permissible for him to detain the conveyance, and accordingly, the third respondent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ugh the vehicle was detained for the purpose of carrying out inspection, no such inspection was carried out or that upon physical verification no discrepancy was found in the conveyance/goods or documents. Clause (g) of the above referred circular requires that where no discrepancies are found after the inspection of the goods and conveyance, the proper officer shall issue forthwith a release order in Form GST MOV-05 and allow the conveyance to move further. The clause further provides that when the proper officer is of the opinion that the goods and conveyance need to be detained under section 129 of the CGST Act, he shall issue an order of detention in Form GST MOV-06 and a notice in Form GST MOV-07 in accordance with the provisions of subsection (3) of section 129 of the CGST Act, specifying the tax and penalty payable and such notice is required to be served on the person in charge of the conveyance. In the facts of the case, despite the fact that no discrepancy appears to have been found after the inspection of the goods and conveyance, the proper officer has not issued a release order in Form GST MOV-05. Further, despite the fact that Form GST MOV-02 was issued, without verif....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o confiscate the same and, therefore, the order of confiscation was not sustained. 9. In the case of Mahadev Enterprise (supra), the Court has held that each matter has to be decided on its own facts and the Tribunal while deciding the case of one party cannot place reliance upon the facts which have come to its knowledge only in another proceeding and apply them to a third party who has no connection with those proceedings. The Court found that there was a complete absence of any materials on record establishing the transaction made being non-genuine. There was also no material to show that the dealer, at any point of time, had been called upon to establish the genuineness of such transactions or to produce any documentary evidence. In this background, the Court had allowed the petition. The relevant findings are as follows: 15. As discussed hereinabove, input tax credit cannot be denied to a party in the absence of the Department having established that the transactions in question are not genuine or that they are bogus etc. In the facts of the present case as emerging from the record, no such material has been brought on record by the respondent. In the facts of the present c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the GST Act which empowers the authority concerned to intercept the vehicle and the goods. The said provision of Section 68 is required to be reproduced. "68. Inspection of goods in movement. (1) The Government may require the person in charge of a conveyance carrying any consignment of goods of value exceeding such amount as may be specified to carry with him such documents and such devices as may be prescribed. (2) The details of documents required to be carried under sub-section (1) shall be validated in such manner as may be prescribed. (3) Where any conveyance referred to in sub-section (1) is intercepted by the proper officer at any place, he may require the person in charge of the said conveyance to produce the documents prescribed under the said subsection and devices for verification, and the said person shall be liable to produce the documents and devices and also allow the inspection of goods." 12. As can also be seen from the materials placed on record that the documents of the goods produced are in order. We could also notice that as per Circular No.41/2018 dated 13.04.2018 and the provisions of the GST Act, a request was made to release the goods and veh....