2021-TIOL-273-HC-DEL-GST
British Biologicals Vs UoI
GST - Petitioner inter alia seeks the quashing and setting aside of notice dated 03rd June, 2020 issued by the Director General of Anti-Profiteering under Section 171 of the Act, 2017 - Respondents pray and are granted four weeks to file their respective counter affidavits and rejoinders, if any, to be filed two weeks thereafter - Matter listed on 20 th May for hearing: High Court [para 4, 5]
- Matter listed: DELHI HIGH COURT
2021-TIOL-272-HC-DEL-GST
Rajesh Kumar Patawa Vs UoI
GST - Petitioner seeks quashing of the Form GST DRC-22 and directions for de-freezing the bank accounts - Counsel for Revenue submits that accounts of the Petitioners have been frozen under Section 83 of the Act consequent upon search action carried out under Section 67 of the CGST Act, 2017 against two companies and when a scam of fraudulent availment of the ITC in respect of 328 companies has been unearthed; that there is an alternate efficacious statutory remedy available under Rule 159(5) of the CGST Rules, 2017 and the Petitioners should avail of the same, instead of knocking on the doors of the writ court seeking relief.
Held: Petitioners states that they are agreeable to the suggestion put forth by Revenue Counsel and are willing to take recourse to the remedy available under the CGST Rules and pray for a time-bound direction to the authorities to decide the objections which shall be filed by the Petitioners in accordance with Rule 159(5) - Petition is disposed of without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the Petitioners, granting them liberty to file their objections, under Rule 159(5) of the Rules, before the Deputy Commissioner, Anti-Evasion, CGST East, against the impugned provisional attachment/freezing of bank accounts - Authority to dispose of the said representation within two weeks - Petition disposed of: High Court [para 3]
- Petition disposed of: DELHI HIGH COURT
2021-TIOL-271-HC-AHM-GST
Sainath Steels Vs State of Gujarat
GST - Notice has been issued to the writ applicant in Form GST MOV-10 calling upon the writ applicant to show cause as to why the goods and conveyance should not be confiscated - Petitioner submits that they had generated the invoice and the E-way bill for the movement of the goods, however, inadvertently, the writ applicant mentioned the Pin Code of his office in Ahmedabad in the E-way Bill, instead of mentioning the Pin Code of the dispatched godown of the vendor from where the goods were picked up; that the E-way bill was otherwise in order insofar as the quantity and value of the goods is concerned; that if the authority concerned would like to investigate further into the matter before taking any final decision is taken as regards the notice of confiscation, he may do so, but at least the goods in question may be ordered to be provisionally released upon deposit of the amount of tax and penalty and which comes to Rs. 2,28,332/-.
Held: Bench is of the view that it should not interfere at the stage of investigation, which is in progress - However, with a view to balance the equities, Bench intends to pass an interim order releasing the goods and the vehicle upon the writ applicant making deposit of the amount towards the tax and penalty i.e. Rs. 2,28,332/- - Matter to be posted on 10.03.2021: High Court [para 4, 5]
- Interim order passed: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2021-TIOL-270-HC-AHM-GST
Universal Dyechem Pvt Ltd Vs UoI
GST - Respondent No. 3 and other officers of the DGGST conducted search and seizure at the principal place of business at Jodhpur on 14th February, 2020 - An order of seizure of certain documents dated 14th February, 2020 came to be passed in Form GST INS-02 - Petitioner submits that despite making numerous requests in writing for the return of documents, the respondent No. 3 has not responded till this date - It is submitted that all those documents are required by the writ applicants for their day to day business, more particularly, for the purpose of audit and filing of the returns; that the documents which are demanded by the writ applicants do not form part of the show-cause notice and in such circumstances, the writ applicants have reasons to believe that all such documents have not been taken into consideration for the purpose of issue of the show-cause notice and further proceedings.
Held: Bench expects the respondent No. 3 to look into the representation dated 21.12.2020, and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law in that regard - Bench is of the view that once the show-cause notice is issued to the party concerned, the documents/records, which have not been relied upon, should be returned to the party - This is what even is suggested in the master circular dated 19.01.2017 which has been referred to in the representation - Writ application is disposed of with a direction to the respondent No. 2 to immediately look into the representation and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law within a period of one week - Writ application stands disposed of - In the event, if the Respondent No. 3 is of the view that such documents, as demanded by the writ applicants, cannot be returned, then he shall assign cogent reasons for such decision and communicate the same in writing to the writ applicants so that they can take necessary recourse available to them in law: High Court [para 6 to 8]
- Application disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
2021-TIOL-269-HC-AHM-GST
Kush Traders Vs State of Gujarat
GST - Matter is at the stage of MOV-10 - Writ applicant seeks quashing of order of detention and release of goods and truck - Bench expects the writ-applicant to participate in the proceedings initiated by the authority for the purpose of confiscation of the goods and the vehicles - The writ-applicant shall file his reply and shall make his case good for the purpose of getting notice discharged in MOV-10 - Ultimately, if the final order of confiscation is passed under Section 130 of the Act, then the writ-applicant will have the remedy to file an appeal under Section 107 of the Act - Writ-application stands disposed of: HC [para 4]
- Application disposed of: GUJARAT HIGH COURT
