A KEnterprise VS State of Gujarat

The summary involves a legal case filed under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution by a GST dealer seeking several reliefs. The dealer requests the court to invalidate and revoke certain orders and show cause notices issued by the Respondent No. 2 on specific dates in September and October 2021, as outlined in Annexures “A” and “A1” of the petition. Additionally, the dealer seeks the immediate release of the goods in question and the conveyance bearing registration number GJ37 T 8745, which was intercepted at Kamrej, Surat.

The petitioner further appeals to the court to issue a stay order on the operation, implementation, and execution of the confiscation order dated October 7, 2021, as detailed in Annexure “A1” to the petition, until the case is fully heard and decided. Additionally, pending the notice, admission, and final hearing of the petition, the dealer requests the court to direct certain actions. However, the details of these actions are not provided in the summary.

The summary pertains to a writ application under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, where the applicant, a GST dealer, seeks several reliefs regarding impugned orders and show cause notices issued by Respondent no. 2, including quashing the orders, releasing seized goods and conveyance, and seeking a stay on the confiscation order. The applicant is identified as the owner of the goods seized and confiscated under Section 130 of the GST Act.

Additionally, there’s mention of a Civil Application filed by another party represented by Mr. Vin, who is the owner of the seized conveyance. This party seeks to be impleaded in the main matter to challenge the legality of the confiscation order. The impugned order, issued under Section 130 of the GST Act, states that the vehicle in question was intercepted at a toll plaza, and the dealer failed to prove the genuineness of the purchase, leading to the conclusion that only bills were purchased and not goods. Consequently, an order under Section 130 was passed, requiring dues to be paid by a specified date.

The writ application under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution seeks various reliefs from the court, including quashing and setting aside orders and show cause notices related to the confiscation of goods and conveyance under the GST Act. The applicant, a dealer under GST, seeks release of the seized goods and conveyance, as well as a stay on the confiscation order pending further proceedings. Additionally, the applicant requests any other reliefs deemed fit by the court and the award of petition costs.

The applicant, identified as the owner of the seized goods, challenges the confiscation under Section 130 of the GST Act. A civil application has also been filed by another party, the owner of the detained conveyance, seeking to be involved in the main matter to challenge the legality of the confiscation order.

The impugned order, issued by respondent No.2 under Section 130 of the GST Act, states that the seized vehicle was intercepted at a toll plaza, and the dealer failed to provide evidence of the genuineness of the purchase. Consequently, the order for confiscation was passed.

In response to the writ application, the respondent argues that while the order may seem cryptic, it effectively communicates the rationale behind the confiscation based on the circumstances of the case.

During the hearing, the writ applicant’s counsel contends that the order lacks specificity and invokes the court’s writ jurisdiction under Article 226 instead of appealing to the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Act.

The Assistant Government Pleader representing the respondent opposes the writ application, asserting that the impugned order adequately conveys the reasons for confiscation based on the evidence available.

After considering arguments from both parties and reviewing the evidence, the court decides not to entertain the writ application against the final confiscation order. Instead, it directs the parties to pursue appropriate appeals before the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Act. The court emphasizes the need for a thorough examination of the evidence and urges expeditious resolution of any appeals filed.

The summary outlines a legal case filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by a GST dealer seeking various reliefs, including the quashing of orders and show cause notices related to the confiscation of goods and a vehicle by Respondent no. 2. The dealer, identified as the writ applicant, asserts that the confiscation under Section 130 of the GST Act lacks proper justification and is challenging the legality of the actions taken.

The impugned order, issued under Section 130 of the GST Act, cites the inability of the dealer to prove the genuineness of the purchase, leading to the confiscation of the goods and the conveyance. The order is contested on the grounds of being non-speaking, meaning it lacks sufficient explanation or reasoning. Instead of appealing to the Appellate Authority under Section 107 of the Act, the writ applicant opts to seek relief through the writ jurisdiction of the Court.

During the proceedings, arguments are presented by both parties. The respondent defends the impugned order, asserting that it effectively communicates the rationale behind the decision. However, the court ultimately decides not to entertain the writ application against the final order of confiscation. Instead, it directs the parties to pursue an appeal before the Appellate Authority, emphasizing that the evidence must be thoroughly examined.

The court’s decision also allows for the possibility of provisional release of the goods and the vehicle pending the appeal process, subject to certain conditions. Additionally, it clarifies that the decision does not reflect any opinion on the merits of the case and stresses that the appeals should be decided strictly on their own merits in accordance with the law.

Furthermore, the court instructs the Appellate Authority not to dismiss the appeals on grounds of limitation, considering the efforts made by the writ applicant and the applicant of the Civil Application to pursue the matter before the High Court. Thus, the issue of delay should not hinder the appeals process.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:

GST Case law: