Case tittle | Irshadbhai Hamidbhai Rain VS State Of Gujarat |
court | Gujarat high court |
Honourable judge | Justice N.V.Anjaria Justice Bhargav D. Karia |
Citation | 2022 (07) GSTPanacea 572 HC Gujarat R/Special Civil Application No. 11240 Of 2022 |
Judgment date | 22-July-2022 |
The case, as presented by Mr. H.J. Trivedi, an advocate representing the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, an advocate general for the respondents, revolves around challenging a notice dated 22.03.2022 in FORM GST MOV-10 and an order dated 16.03.2022 in FORM GST MOV-6. These documents led to the confiscation and detention of goods and conveyance belonging to the petitioner. The primary prayer of the petitioner is to have these documents set aside. Additionally, the petitioner seeks interim relief to suspend the operation and implementation of an order dated 03.05.2022 passed in FORM GST MOV-11 under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act.
In a recent legal proceeding, advocate Mr. H.J. Trivedi, representing the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, acting as the learned AGP for the respondents, engaged in a detailed discussion regarding the admission of the petition and the potential grant of interim relief.
The primary request from the petitioner is to nullify a notice issued on 22nd March 2022 in FORM GST MOV-10, along with an order dated 16th March 2022 in FORM GST MOV-6. These documents led to the confiscation and detention of the petitioner’s goods and conveyance.
Furthermore, the petitioner seeks interim relief to halt the enforcement of an order issued on 3rd May 2022 in FORM GST MOV-11, pursuant to Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The case involves a petition brought forth by the petitioner, represented by Mr. H.J. Trivedi, seeking to annul a notice dated 22.03.2022 and an order dated 16.03.2022, both pertaining to the confiscation and detention of goods and conveyance. Additionally, interim relief is requested to suspend the enforcement of an order dated 03.05.2022 passed under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (CGST Act).
The incident leading to the petition occurred when the petitioner transported iron and steel scrap to a buyer. During transit in a truck with registration No. GJ-18-U-7264, authorities intercepted the vehicle and seized both the goods and the vehicle, subsequently issuing notices and orders for tax, penalty, and fines.
A pivotal issue in the petition concerns the interpretation and application of Sections 129 and 130 of the CGST Act, along with the nature of powers granted therein.
It’s noted that a prior case, Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2012, involving a similar point, is already in progress and is set for returnable on 08.09.2022. The present petition is to be heard concurrently with this case.
Regarding interim relief for the release of the petitioner’s goods and vehicle, it’s suggested that the same conditions as those imposed in the order dated 01.07.2022 for Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2012 be considered.
In a recent legal proceeding, Mr. H.J. Trivedi, an advocate representing the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, the learned AGP representing the respondents, presented arguments regarding the admission of a petition and the grant of interim relief.
The petitioner’s main request was to overturn a notice dated 22.03.2022 in FORM GST MOV-10 and an order dated 16.03.2022 in FORM GST MOV-6, which resulted in the confiscation and detention of the petitioner’s goods and conveyance. Additionally, the petitioner sought interim relief to halt the enforcement of an order dated 03.05.2022 passed in FORM GST MOV-11 under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
The case revolves around the transportation of iron and steel scrap by the petitioner, which was intercepted by the respondent authorities while en route to the buyer. Subsequently, the goods and vehicle were confiscated, and notices demanding tax, penalty, and fines were issued. The central issue concerns the interpretation and application of Sections 129 and 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the extent of powers conferred by these provisions.
A related case, Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2012, which involves a similar legal point, is pending and scheduled for a hearing on 08.09.2022. The petitioner requested interim relief similar to that granted in the aforementioned case.
The impugned order demanded a penalty of Rs. 1,35,216/-, fines and charges totaling Rs. 7,51,204/-, and outstanding tax of Rs. 1,35,216/-.
Regarding interim relief, the court directed the respondents to release the confiscated goods and conveyance, subject to certain conditions. These conditions include the petitioner depositing the tax and penalty amounts and furnishing a bond for the fine. Upon fulfillment of these conditions, the authorities are instructed to release the petitioner’s goods and conveyance.
In essence, the legal proceedings involve a dispute over the confiscation and detention of goods and conveyance by the tax authorities, with the petitioner seeking relief from the court pending a final decision on the matter.
Download PDF:
For Reference Visit:
Read Another Case Law:
GST Case Law: