TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1201X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order dated 14.10.2019 passed by this court whereby the notice was issued and was made returnable. It is not in dispute that on the same day, however, that is on 15.10.2019, the respondent No.2 proceeded to pass order of confiscation of goods and conveyance and demanded tax, fine and penalty under section 130 of the Act. The petitioner pointed out that he had already deposited the amount of tax and penalty. Thus, it transpires that the petitioner was called to remain present before respondent No.2 on 15.10.2019. The petitioner appeared and submitted about the pendency of the petition, however, respondent No.2 authority passed order dated 15.10.2019 under section 130 of the Act, which was on the same date. Whereby all proposals in GST MOV ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icle-truck bearing No. GJ-21-W-6977 alongwith the goods contained therein. 2.1 Order under section 130 of Act was passed subsequent to filling of the petition under section 130 of Act. The petitioner challenged the said order dated 5.10.2019 (FORM GST MOV 11) by amending the prayer clause. 3. Notice in the petition was issued on 14.10.2019. Notice as to interim relief was also issued making returnable on 16.10.2019. It appears that respondent No.2 issued notice dated 5.10.2019 to the petitioner calling upon the petitioner to remain present on 15.10.2019. As far as the aspect of detention of conveyance as well as goods lying in the conveyance was concerned, the petitioner had deposited the amount of tax and penalty. 3.1 As per order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espondent No.2 authority passed order dated 15.10.2019 under section 130 of the Act, which was on the same date. Whereby all proposals in GST MOV 10 were confirmed regarding levy of tax, fine etc.. 5. Therefore, what becomes clear is that order dated 15.10.2019 under section 130 of the Act came to be passed without affording any opportunity to the petitioner. As noticed above, the petitioner was called to remain present and on the same date the order came to be passed. It amounted to breach of principles of natural justice resulting into denial of reasonable opportunity to the petitioner to defend in the proceedings. 5.1 On the aforesaid sole ground, order dated 15.10.2019 (FORM GST MOV 11) passed under section 130 of the CGST ACT is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
