Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (10) TMI 574

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e issued in Form GST MOV-10 along with the order that is to be served on the assessee in Form GST MOV-11. The said requirement is over and above the requirement to give reasons to support the demand in the order of confiscation passed in Form GST MOV-11. In as much as it is not in dispute that the reasons that weighed with the adjudicating authority while passing the impugned orders of confiscation were not enclosed with the said orders, Exts.P4 and P4(a) orders 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 - As is well settled in law, the absence of reasons by an adjudicating authority in t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... und 4:00 PM on 22.09.2020, when the petitioner contacted the transporter for obtaining vehicles for transportation of the goods to Kanjikode, the transporter responded by stating that the vehicles could be made available only by 3:00 AM on the next day, namely 23.9.2020. According to the petitioner, after the vehicles came to the premises, they were duly loaded with the consignment, and the transportation commenced shortly thereafter by 3:00AM on 23.09.2020. It is its case that, at about 6:30 AM on 23.9.2020, the vehicles were intercepted by the 1st respondent at Kanjikode, and the petitioner was served with Exts.P3 and P3(a) notices under Form GST MOV-10, proposing a confiscation of the goods and the vehicle. In the notice issued to the pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... showed that the vehicles had passed through the check post towards Coimbatore on the evening of 22.9.2020 and had thereafter once again crossed the check post, heading in the opposite direction, on the morning of 23.09.2020. The inference drawn by the respondents from the said data obtained from the cameras installed at Walayar is that the vehicles in question were used for multiple transportation under cover of the same transport document issued by the petitioner in the instant case. It is further stated that the respondent had duly complied with the procedure of issuing the necessary notices, initially in terms of Section 129 of the GST Act and later under Section 130 of the GST Act, and it is only after recording the statements of the dr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m in Form GST MOV-10 ( Exts.P3 and P3(a)). In my view, when a notice proposing confiscation is issued to an assessee, and an opportunity of hearing mandated by the statute before passing an order of confiscation, then the principles of fairness would mandate that the assessee be given an adequate opportunity to the respond to the allegations raised against him through the notices proposing confiscation. Thereafter, 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. As matter of fact, the statutory format for passing an order of confiscation under Section 130, namely Form GST MOV-10, clearly contains at P .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y the reviewing court is that the adjudicating authority did not have any reason to give. In reaching the said conclusion, I am guided by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Kranti Associates (P) Lts.V. Masood Ahmed Khan [(2010) 9 SCC 496] as also the observations of the Gujarat High Court in Sitaram roadways (URP) V. State of Gujarat [(2020) 76 GSTR 51(GUJ)] and Synergy Fertichem (P) Ltd. V. State of Gujarat [(2020) 76 GSTR 81 (GUJ)]. 6. The upshot of the aforesaid discussion is that Exts.P4 and P4(a) orders shall stand quashed and the matter is remanded to the adjudicating authority for a reconsideration of the matter and to pass fresh orders after hearing the petitioner. To enable the 1 st respondent to do so, I direct the petitioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates