TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 422X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cause notice and passing of the proceedings consequent upon the admission of the guilt of the petitioner are true, the respondents can be said to have followed the procedure contemplated under Section 130. The question is whether the show cause notice dated 11.03.2018 was issued to the petitioner and whether the petitioner executed the confession letter dated 12.03.2018. The petitioner s explanation in his reply is that he did not receive the show cause notice and did not execute the confession letter dated 12.03.2018. In the writ averments, the petitioner at the first instance did not take any plea that his signatures were obtained on blank papers. It is only after the respondents filed their counter and enclosed the show cause notice and other documents, then in the reply affidavit the petitioner for the first time took such plea. Hence, the contention of the petitioner does not merit consideration. So at the outset the confiscation proceedings and imposition of fine in lieu of confiscation etc., undertaken by the 1st respondent cannot be said to be in violation of law and rules. Petition dismissed. - Writ Petition No.113 of 2020 - - - Dated:- 9-7-2021 - HON'BLE SRI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... @ ₹ 40/- per K.g by obtaining photo copies of Aadhaar cards of aforesaid two farmers and mentioning all the details as stated supra and transported in his vehicle bearing No.KA01 AC8239 to his business place in Punganur. (d) During the transit, the 1st respondent intercepted the vehicle and issued impugned notice of detention under Section 129 of A.P GST Act, 2017, dated 11.03.2018 on the ground that the driver failed to produce relevant documents i.e., tax invoice and delivery challan, which are mandatory under the AP GST Act, 2017. Though petitioner informed to the 1st respondent that as per instructions in the meeting, he obtained Aadhaar cards of the farmers containing necessary details, the 1st respondent did not heed and refused to release the goods unless the petitioner deposited ₹ 5,15,000/- i.e., ₹ 35,250 towards tax; ₹ 32,500/- towards penalty and ₹ 4,50,000/- towards others . He informed that the petitioner can make his submission during the course of assessment proceedings. As the tamarind is prone for speedy deterioration, having no other go, the petitioner deposited ₹ 5,15,000/- on 14.03.2018 and got the commodity released on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led to submit any documents prescribed under Section 68 r/w 138 of the GST Act, 2017 and Section 20 of IGST Act, 2017 for carrying the taxable goods. He only furnished two weightment slips bearing serial number 10014, dated 10.03.2018 and except that he did not produce any other documents. He disclosed the particulars of the consignee as M/s TMB Traders, Punganuru. He did not produce any documents like Aadhaar card containing the particulars as alleged by the petitioner. (b) Having suspected the weight of the commodity, the Inspecting Authority got weighed it again by M/s Vikram Electronic Weigh Bridge, Near Gangamagudi, Punganur Road, Madanapalli and found that the total flower tamarind under transport was 8195 Kgs. The driver failed to produce the details of consigners. As there was no need to go for further enquiry as the goods are taxable, transported without any records, a show cause notice was issued on 11.03.2018 duly providing an opportunity to file written objections as well as to avail personal hearing. The said show cause notice was issued to the petitioner and the same was received on his own handwriting and seal. The petitioner himself filed consent letter dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ain plank of argument of learned counsel for petitioner Sri G. Narendra Chetty is that the petitioner s vehicle was intercepted by the 1st respondent on 11.03.2018 and detained by issuing a notice of detention under Section 129 of A.P GST Act, 2017 on the ground that the petitioner s driver failed to produce relevant documents. Learned counsel pointed out that at that time the 1st respondent did not contemplate to confiscate the commodity under Section 130 of AP GST Act and no notice was issued to that effect. Be that it may, the petitioner explained that the commodity was wet tamarind and it was procured from the farmers of Karnataka and as they are not regular registered dealers, following instructions given in the meeting held by GST Authorities, the Photostat copies of the Aadhaar cards of the farmers containing the particulars of the consignee were obtained. In spite of producing those copies of Aadhaar cards, the 1st respondent did not release the commodity and vehicle and insisted for regular invoices. Learned counsel further argued that as the 1st respondent was insisting the invoices and refusing to release the stock which was a perishable commodity, in such unavoidable ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice were violated. He thus prayed to set aside the summary order dated 02.12.2019. 7. Per contra, learned Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes argued that on 11.03.2018 the 1st respondent while intercepting the vehicle, found that the flower tamarind was being transported without relevant documents. As the driver failed to produce the documents, he initiated the confiscation proceedings under Section 130 of AP GST Act and issued show cause notice wherein he clearly mentioned that he was invoking the confiscation proceedings under Section 130 of AP GST Act. Having received the same, the petitioner filed a confession letter dated 12.03.2018 admitting his guilt. Thereafter, 1st respondent issued proceedings dated 14.03.2018 and collected fine of ₹ 4,15,000/- in lieu of confiscation and penalty of ₹ 32,500/- each and released the commodities. To that effect, a release order dated 14.03.2018 was also issued. Learned Government Pleader vehemently argued that in view of aforesaid proceedings, particularly the confession letter admitting his guilt, the writ petition is not maintainable. He argued that the petitioner cannot now argue that no show cause notice was issued ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be noted, for contravention of the above provisions, the proper Officer has two courses to follow under Section 129 and 130 of the Act. Section 129 deals with detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyance in transit. Whereas Section 130 deals with confiscation of goods or conveyance and levy of penalty. 9. It should be noted, a question had arisen as to whether the proceedings under Section 129 and 130 of the AP GST Act can be initiated simultaneously. In Synergy Fertichem Pvt. Ltd.2020(33) G.S.T.L. 513 (Guj).) = MANU/GJ/3200/2019 , a Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court dealt with the precise question as to whether Section 129 130 of CGST Act overlap or are independent to each other. On an elaborate discussion, they gave their final conclusions as follows: (i) Section 129 of the Act talks about detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit. On the other hand, Section 130 talks about confiscation of goods or conveyance and levy of tax, penalty and fine thereof. Although, both the sections start with a non-obstante clause, yet, the harmonious reading of the two sections, keeping in mind the object and purpose behind the enactment the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is supplied). (vii) Sections 129 and 130 respectively of the Act are mutually exclusive and independent of each other. (emphasis supplied). If the amount of tax and penalty, as determined under Section 129 of the Act for the purpose of release of the goods and the conveyance, is not deposited within the statutory time period, then the consequence of the same would be forfeiture of the goods and the vehicle with the Government. This does not necessarily imply that the confiscation proceedings can be initiated only in the event of the failure on the part of the owner of the goods or the conveyance in depositing the amount towards the tax and liability determined under Section 129 of the Act. (viii) For the purpose of Section 129(6) of the Act, it would not be necessary for the department to establish any intention to evade payment of tax. If the tax and penalty, as determined under Section 129, is not deposited within the statutory time period, then the goods and the conveyance shall be liable to be put to auction and the sale proceeds shall be deposited with the Government. (ix) xxx (x) xxx (xi) xxx (xii) xxx (xiii) xx (xiv) x ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
