Where Competent Authority had detained goods of assessee under
transport and demanded tax as well as penalty and assessee furnished bank
guarantee for tax and penalty imposed and had goods released, Competent
Authority was restrained from invoking bank guarantee till assessee exhausted
statutory remedy
HIGH COURT
OF KERALA
Safa Mill
Stores
v.
Assistant
State Tax Officer, Karukutty
DAMA
SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
W.P. (C)
NO. 29390 OF 2018
SEPTEMBER
6, 2018
Aji V. Dev for the
Petitioner. GP. DR. Thushara James for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
1. The petitioner, a partnership firm, transported certain goods
ostensibly from Bombay to Perumbavoor. But when the petitioner tried to unload
the goods at Malamury, Perumbavoor, the authorities checked the documents
carried along with the goods and found that they did not correctly reflect the
destination point. Suspecting tax evasion, the authorities detained the goods
and demanded penalty as well as tax. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed WPC
No.10256 of 2018 for the release of goods and for the expeditious completion of
adjudication.
2. In terms of the judgment in WPC No.10256/2018, the
petitioner furnished bank guarantee for the tax and penalty imposed, and had
the goods released.
3. Later, the primary
authority completed the adjudication and issued the Ext.P5 order, against which
the petitioner intends to file a statutory appeal-within limitation. But he
apprehends that the authorities, in the meanwhile, may encash the bank
guarantee.
4. The learned
Government Pleader, on the other hand, submits that the appellate authority has
already been constituted under Section 107(1) of the CGST/SGST Act; the
petitioner may file the statutory appeal in time.
Therefore, I restrain
the authorities from invoking the bank guarantee under Ext.P5 till the
petitioner exhausts the statutory remedy or till the appeal gets barred by
limitation.
With these observations,
I dispose of this writ petition.
Posts
0 comments :
Post a Comment