According to the petitioner, the failure to produce e-way bill by the driver at the time of interception of the vehicle is a bona fide error. In any event, the officer by the impugned order could not have levied tax, penalty or fine on the market value of the property. this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner must avail the alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Confiscation of goods- In the instant case, the Commercial Tax Officer has passed orders for confiscation of ‘Goods’ and ‘Conveyance’ under Section 130 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as well as Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (For short, ‘IGST Act’). The said officer has concluded that there is contravention of Sub-Sections (i) and (v) of the provisions of Section 130(1) CGST Act.
The failure to produce e-way bill by the driver at the time of interception of the vehicle on Huliyal – Shira road enroute to Delhi is a bona fide error. In any event, the officer by the impugned order could not have levied tax, penalty or fine on the market value of the property.
Held that- In the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the light of the enunciation by the Division Bench in W.A.No.3974/2019, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner must avail the alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. At this point of time, Sri Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate points out that the authorities have not taken any precipitous action because the appeal time has not lapsed.
According to the petitioner, the failure to produce e-way bill by the driver at the time of interception of the vehicle is a bona fide error. In any event, the officer by the impugned order could not have levied tax, penalty or fine on the market value of the property. this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner must avail the alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act.
Confiscation of goods- In the instant case, the Commercial Tax Officer has passed orders for confiscation of ‘Goods’ and ‘Conveyance’ under Section 130 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 as well as Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (For short, ‘IGST Act’). The said officer has concluded that there is contravention of Sub-Sections (i) and (v) of the provisions of Section 130(1) CGST Act.
The failure to produce e-way bill by the driver at the time of interception of the vehicle on Huliyal – Shira road enroute to Delhi is a bona fide error. In any event, the officer by the impugned order could not have levied tax, penalty or fine on the market value of the property.
Held that- In the facts and circumstances of the case, and in the light of the enunciation by the Division Bench in W.A.No.3974/2019, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner must avail the alternative remedy under Section 107 of the CGST Act. At this point of time, Sri Hema Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate points out that the authorities have not taken any precipitous action because the appeal time has not lapsed.