Orders that are impugned in the writ petition have to be quashed on the ground that they do not reflect an application of mind by the adjudicating authority on the objection/ explanation of the assessee against the proposal for confiscation.
Section 129 of the CGST Act — Goods in Transit –-- The petitioner challenged the confiscation order under Section 130 of the Act, The petitioner raised two invoices and generated two e way bills. Although the e-way bills were raised around 4:00 PM on 22.09.2020, but the goods were loaded on next day at 3.00 AM. The vehicle was intercepted at about 6:30 AM on 23.9.2020,and the petitioner was served with notices under Form GST MOV-10, proposing a confiscation of the goods and the vehicle. The petitioner submitted that they did not get an adequate opportunity to file objections to notices and further, that the order passed in Form GST MOV-11. The respondent submitted that they had duly complied with the procedure of issuing the necessary notices, initially in terms of Section 129 of the Act and under Section 130 and only after recording the statements, the orders of confiscation were passed in Form MOV-11. The court observed that the objections/ explanation given by the assessee have to be considered by the adjudicating authority, and a reasoned order passed by him, reflecting a consideration of the said objections.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the orders and remitted the matter back to the adjudicating authority and to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to appear on 11:00 AM on 19.10.2020.
Orders that are impugned in the writ petition have to be quashed on the ground that they do not reflect an application of mind by the adjudicating authority on the objection/ explanation of the assessee against the proposal for confiscation.
Section 129 of the CGST Act — Goods in Transit –-- The petitioner challenged the confiscation order under Section 130 of the Act, The petitioner raised two invoices and generated two e way bills. Although the e-way bills were raised around 4:00 PM on 22.09.2020, but the goods were loaded on next day at 3.00 AM. The vehicle was intercepted at about 6:30 AM on 23.9.2020,and the petitioner was served with notices under Form GST MOV-10, proposing a confiscation of the goods and the vehicle. The petitioner submitted that they did not get an adequate opportunity to file objections to notices and further, that the order passed in Form GST MOV-11. The respondent submitted that they had duly complied with the procedure of issuing the necessary notices, initially in terms of Section 129 of the Act and under Section 130 and only after recording the statements, the orders of confiscation were passed in Form MOV-11. The court observed that the objections/ explanation given by the assessee have to be considered by the adjudicating authority, and a reasoned order passed by him, reflecting a consideration of the said objections.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court quashed the orders and remitted the matter back to the adjudicating authority and to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner is directed to appear on 11:00 AM on 19.10.2020.