2026 (1) TMI 895

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e behest of the writ petitioner and directed against order dated December 17, 2025 passed in WPA 2021 of 2025. 2. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that, the appellant is the owner of the consignment. Consignment is perishable in nature. He refers to the show-cause notice. He submits that, the quantum of penalty that can be imposed in terms of the show-cause notice is Rs. 5,23,264/-. Appellant is ready and willing to furnish such amount by way of a security to the authority. He also submits that, since the goods are perishable in nature, the same should be allowed to be released. 3. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that, there is no dispute with regard to the ownership of the consig....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Tax Act, 2017 read with Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. 9. No material is placed before us to suggest that, claim of ownership of the appellant before us in respect of the consignment concerned is incorrect. There are no other claimants in respect of the consignment concerned. 10. The notice under Section 129(3) of the Act of 2017 was impugned by way of a writ petition where as an interim measure appellant sought release of the seized goods. 11. Impugned notice dated August 29, 2025 assessed the penalty leviable on various parameters. One of the parameters is with regard to the liability of an owner of the goods. Such liability is quantified at Rs. 5,23,264/-. 12. Appellant before us is claiming o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nment at rest with the appellant being treated as the owner of the seized consignment as documents of title were accompanying the seized goods. 18. In M/s. JJ Traders (supra), the Court directed release of the goods and the conveyance taking into account the perishable nature of the areca nuts seized by directing furnishing of security in terms of the Section 129(1)(a) of the Act of 2017 and furnishing security for the balance sum determined under Section 129(1)(b) of the Act of 2017 in the form of a bank guarantee. Factual scenario in the present case is different. No one before us is claiming release of the vehicle. 19. In S.N. Trading Company & Anr. (supra), Hon'ble Supreme Court during consideration of a Special Leave Petition sou....