Judicial and Legal Details
Honorable Judges N.V. Anjaria & Devan M. Desai presiding. Bhaumik Dholariya representing the Petitioner. Raj Tanna representing the Respondent.
Case Background
In this case, the petitioner filed an interim prayer seeking the release of goods and conveyance. It was argued that while the goods were being transported, the GST authorities intervened and utilized their powers under section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017 (the Act) to seize both the goods and the conveyance. Subsequently, the authorities also invoked powers under section 130 of the Act and issued a confiscation order.
The petitioner asserted that the authorities took possession of the goods in transit under Section 129 of the Act. It was argued that Section 129, starting with a nonobstante clause, is an independent provision separate from Section 130. Hence, the authorities’ action of transitioning to Section 130 and issuing a notice thereunder, without granting the benefit of releasing the goods under Section 129, was deemed to be without jurisdiction.
The decision of the High Court
The Honorable High Court observed that in similar cases, this Court has already granted interim relief for the release of goods and conveyance, albeit subject to certain conditions. Consequently, the Court held that the matter will be scheduled for a hearing. However, as an interim measure, the goods and the vehicle shall be released by the authorities upon the payment of a penalty or the provision of a bank guarantee. This ruling ensures compliance with the conditions imposed by the Court in previous cases.