Shyamji Trading Company VS State of Gujarat

Mr. Samreer Gupta, representing Mr. Monal Chaglani, the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, the learned Additional Government Pleader (AGP), representing the respondents, presented their arguments for the admission of the petition and/or the grant of interim relief.

The primary request of the petitioner is to invalidate the notice dated 19.09.2022, issued in FORM GST MOV-10, which led to the confiscation and detention of the petitioner’s goods and conveyance.

Additionally, as part of interim relief, the petitioner seeks a directive for the respondent authorities to release the goods and the confiscated vehicle, which were detained under sections 129 and 130 of the Goods and Services

The case presented by Mr. Samreer Gupta on behalf of Mr. Monal Chaglani, the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, representing the respondents, revolves around the petition’s request to invalidate a notice dated 19.09.2022 issued in FORM GST MOV-10. This notice led to the confiscation and detention of the petitioner’s goods and conveyance under sections 129 and 130 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The petitioner seeks interim relief to compel the respondent authorities to release the confiscated goods and vehicle. The incident leading to the confiscation occurred during the transportation of goods (specifically Arecanut) by the petitioner to the buyer. While en route to the destination in a truck with registration No. NL-01-AF-2251, the vehicle was intercepted by the respondent authorities, resulting in the confiscation of both the goods and the vehicle. Subsequently, notices and orders demanding tax, penalty, and fines were issued.

The crux of the matter lies in the interpretation and application of Section 129 and Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the nature of powers exercisable under these provisions.

Additionally, it was noted that a similar issue is being addressed in Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2022, which has been subjected to Rule and is returnable on 23.11.2022. The petitioner requests that their case be heard in conjunction with Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2022.

Regarding the prayer for interim relief concerning the release of the goods and vehicle, it is suggested that similar conditions to those imposed in a previous order dated 01.07.2022 in Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2022 be considered.

Mr. Samreer Gupta, representing Mr. Monal Chaglani, the petitioner, and Mr. Krutik Parikh, learned AGP representing the respondents, presented arguments regarding the admission of the petition and the potential grant of interim relief.

The primary request from the petitioner is to invalidate a notice dated 19.09.2022 in FORM GST MOV-10, which resulted in the confiscation and detention of the petitioner’s goods and conveyance. Additionally, the petitioner seeks interim relief to compel the respondent authorities to release the confiscated goods and vehicle under sections 129 and 130 of the Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

The case stems from the transportation of goods (Arecanut) by the petitioner to a buyer via a transporter. However, during transit in a truck with registration No. NL-01-AF-2251, the vehicle was intercepted by the respondent authorities, leading to the confiscation of both the goods and the vehicle. Subsequently, notices and orders demanding tax, penalty, and fines were issued.

The crux of the matter revolves around the interpretation and application of Section 129 and Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and the nature of powers exercised under these provisions.

It’s noted that a similar issue is under consideration in Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2022, scheduled for hearing on 23.11.2022.

Regarding interim relief, the petitioner seeks similar conditions as those imposed in a prior order dated 01.07.2022 in Special Civil Application No. 8353 of 2022.

The impugned order demands a penalty amount of Rs. 3,21,230/-, a fine of Rs. 64,24,600/- in lieu of confiscation of goods, and a tax amount of Rs. 3,21,230/-.

The interim relief sought directs the respondents to release the petitioner’s confiscated goods and conveyance, subject to conditions:

1. The petitioner deposits Rs. 3,21,230/- as tax.

2. The petitioner deposits Rs. 3,21,230/- as penalty.

3. The petitioner furnishes a bond of Rs. 64,24,600/- towards the fine.

Upon compliance with these conditions, the authorities are directed to release the petitioner’s goods and conveyance.

Download PDF:

For Reference Visit:

Read Another Case Law:                                      

GST Case law: