A failure of natural justice has been occasioned to the petitioner, the service on the driver or a fixation of the copy of the order on the truck in question is none of the methods prescribed under Section 169 GST Act and thus it is clear that the orders were never served
Section 129 and 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Goods in Transit ---The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 05.08.2020 passed the provisions of section 130 of Act in relation to the goods; for quashing the order dated 23.01.2020 Form GST MOV-09 related to goods. The petitioner submitted that none of the notices as are required to be served under Section 129 of the Act have been served upon the petitioner. The respondent submitted that the order was got served upon the driver of the truck and the order MOV-06 and MOV-07 was also served on the driver of the truck and with regard to the order dated 23.1.2020, MOV-09, the same was neither served on the driver nor on the owner and was served through a fixation on the truck. The petitioner submitted that Section 169 of the Act provides for the manner of service of notice in certain circumstances and the service on the driver or a fixation of the copy of the order on the truck in question is none of the methods prescribed under Section 169 of the Act. The petitioner preferred appeal but the same was dismissed on the ground that no reply was filed to the notices sent. The court observed that a failure of natural justice has been occasioned to the petitioner.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order dated 5.8.2020 and the order dated 23.1.2020 with a liberty to the respondents to conclude proceedings against the petitioner, in accordance with law. As the notices have now been served upon the petitioner, the petitioner shall file a fresh reply to the same within a period of three weeks and the respondents shall pass fresh orders within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the objections, in accordance with law.
A failure of natural justice has been occasioned to the petitioner, the service on the driver or a fixation of the copy of the order on the truck in question is none of the methods prescribed under Section 169 GST Act and thus it is clear that the orders were never served
Section 129 and 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 – Goods in Transit ---The petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 05.08.2020 passed the provisions of section 130 of Act in relation to the goods; for quashing the order dated 23.01.2020 Form GST MOV-09 related to goods. The petitioner submitted that none of the notices as are required to be served under Section 129 of the Act have been served upon the petitioner. The respondent submitted that the order was got served upon the driver of the truck and the order MOV-06 and MOV-07 was also served on the driver of the truck and with regard to the order dated 23.1.2020, MOV-09, the same was neither served on the driver nor on the owner and was served through a fixation on the truck. The petitioner submitted that Section 169 of the Act provides for the manner of service of notice in certain circumstances and the service on the driver or a fixation of the copy of the order on the truck in question is none of the methods prescribed under Section 169 of the Act. The petitioner preferred appeal but the same was dismissed on the ground that no reply was filed to the notices sent. The court observed that a failure of natural justice has been occasioned to the petitioner.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court set aside the order dated 5.8.2020 and the order dated 23.1.2020 with a liberty to the respondents to conclude proceedings against the petitioner, in accordance with law. As the notices have now been served upon the petitioner, the petitioner shall file a fresh reply to the same within a period of three weeks and the respondents shall pass fresh orders within a period of four weeks from the date of filing of the objections, in accordance with law.