9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1382X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Joint Commissioner (Appeals), Thrissur in proceedings under Section 107 of the CGST / SGST Acts. The petitioner (assessee) in W.P.(C) No. 4244 of 2024 seeks an implementation of the order of the Appellate Authority. W.P(C) No. 6114 of 2024 has been filed by the State challenging the aforesaid order of the Appellate Authority. Both these writ petitions came to be filed before this Court on account of the fact that the Tribunal to be constituted under the CGST / SGST Acts to consider a further appeal under Section 112 of the CGST / SGST Acts has not so far been constituted. The parties and the exhibits referred to in this judgment are as they appear in W.P. (C) No. 4244 of 2024. 2. The brief facts are as follows:- The petitioner is an a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in the actual quantity of gold (owing to the clerical mistake while preparing the delivery challan) the 1st respondent seized the gold in exercise of his powers under Section 67 (2) of the CGST / SGST Acts. The matter was thereafter adjudicated through Ext. P4 order by the 2nd respondent, who held that the entire quantity of gold was liable to be confiscated and also imposed a total penalty of Rs. 2,75,128/-. The 2nd respondent also imposed a fine in lieu of confiscation of goods at Rs. 88,95,826/-. Being aggrieved by Ext. P4 order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the 1st Appellate Authority, who by Ext.P5 order found that the imposition of penalty and fine in lieu of confiscation in respect of 1332.590 grams was not proper and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 303 of 2024 and connected cases to contend that in cases like these where the State is aggrieved by the order of the adjudicating authority or the Appellate Authority directing release of some seized material and the assessee / importer is before the Court seeking implementation of the said order by releasing the seized material, the Court should direct the release of the material against a simple bond along with details of any immovable property that can be proceeded against to enforce the liability under the bond if such situation is warranted on a culmination of the proceedings. 5. The learned Special Government Pleader, on the other hand, relies ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... goods in question in this case (namely the gold ornaments) are liable for confiscation, since it is settled that the goods can be released on the payment of fine in lieu of confiscation and considering the fact that the gold ornaments are stock-in-trade of the petitioner, I am inclined to dispose of these writ petitions without going into the merits of the contentions raised by either side and directing that the entire quantity of 1647.970 grams of gold which has been seized from the petitioner shall be released on the aforesaid Diljith K K and the aforesaid Mohandas K K executing bonds in the manner and form required by the 2nd respondent. The aforesaid Diljith K K and the aforesaid Mohandas K K will undertake that they will not alienate t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
