TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 1458
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent no. 4 as well as the impugned appellate order dated 28.06.2025 passed by the respondent no. 3. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the goods in question were in transit from Delhi to Raipur along with tax invoice and GR, but the same were intercepted at Jhansi (UP) on 26.05.2025; whereby, proceedings under section 129 of the UPGST/CGST/IGST Act were initiated and MOV - 01 was issued on 27.05.2025. On 01.06.2025, MOV - 04 was issued. He further submits that thereafter, MOV - 06 was issued on 01.06.2025 and GST DRC - 01 was issued on 03.06.2025. He further submits that once the goods were detained on 26.05.2025 and the show cause notice has been issued after a week, i.e., 7 days, the entire proceedings are vitiated. He further submits that the authorities are duty-bound to follow the provisions of the GST Act. In support of his submissions, he has placed reliance on the judgement of the Madras High Court in M/s D.K. Enterprises Vs. The Assistant Deputy Commissioner (ST) & Others [(2022) 107 GSTR 331 (Mad)]. 5. He next submits that due to inadvertent mistake of the truck driver, the document could not be produced at the time of detention as all the documents were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ause notice has been issued on 03.06.2025, i.e., within 7 days of the detention order. Therefore, the judgement relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners in M/s D.K. Enterprises (supra) is of no help to the petitioners. 10. He further submits that the application under section 112 of the CGST Act has rightly been rejected as no proper reason, as required under the Rules, was averred by the petitioner in its application. He further submits that there is no delay in passing the order as suggested by the counsel of the petitioner. The proceedings were rightly initiated within the time prescribed under the CGST Act and the petitioner is put to strict proof of the same. 11. He further submits that the findings of fact recorded in the impugned order have not been assailed by the petitioners in any of its paragraphs of the writ petition. He further submits that the findings of fact have been recorded against the petitioners alleging that the documents filed are bogus, forged and fictitious as neither the purchaser has shown its purchases in its return, nor the alleged seller has shown its purchases in its return. Once the seller itself has not shown its purchases in its....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he contention of the petitioner that no notification was issued and in absence of any notification under section 4 of the IGST Act has no force, cannot be sustained. 18. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in Advantage India Logistics Private Limited (supra) has held as under:- "13. On due consideration of the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties so also the provisions of Section 4 of the IGST Act, we are of the view that officers appointed under the MPGST Act are authorized to be proper officers for the purpose of IGST and, therefore, the contention of the petitioner that no notification was issued and in absence of any notification under Section 4 of the IGST Act has no force, we cannot accept the contention of the petitioner that the action of the respondent No.4 is wholly without jurisdiction." 19. Similar view has been taken by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in (supra) M/s Bright Road Logistics, the relevant part of which is quoted below:- "20. Apart from the enabling provisions under the IGST Act, 2017, the Commissioner of State Tax, Haryana had issued the order dated 07.12.2017 (Annexure P-46) exercising the powers conferred under sub-se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#2354; में तैनात राज्य कर के सहायक आयुक्त ३. सचलदल में तैनात राज्य कर अधिकारी 67(11), 68, 70, 126, 127, 129, 130 Circular dated 04.08.2020 क०स० अधिकारी का पदनाम उ०प्र० माल एवं सेवा कर अधिनियम २०१७ की धारा 7. १. सचल दल इकाई में तैनात राज्य कर के उपायुक्त २. सचल दल ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....49]. The relevant paragraph no. 10 of the said judgement is quoted below: "10. A precedent is a judicial decision containing a principle, which forms an authoritative element termed as ratio decidendi. An interim order which does not finally and conclusively decide an issue cannot be a precedent. Any reasons assigned in support of such non-final interim order containing prima facie findings, are only tentative. Any interim directions issued on the basis of such prima facie findings are temporary arrangements to preserve the status quo till the matter is finally decided, to ensure that the matter does not become either infructuous or a fait accompli before the final hearing. The observations and directions in Kapil Hingorani (I) and (II) being interim directions based on tentative reasons, restricted to the peculiar facts of that case involving an extraordinary situation of human rights violation resulting in starvation deaths and suicides by reason of non- payment of salaries to the employees of a large number of public sector undertakings for several years, have no value as precedents. The interim directions were also clearly in exercise of extra-ordinary power under Arti....