Page 263 - GSTL_26th March 2020_Vol 34_Part 4

2020 ] SUBJECT INDEX 757
Seizure (Contd.)
plea that seized goods are already GST paid, authorities directed to
release vehicle and goods by obtaining Bank Guarantee of amount of
probable penalty only - Petitioner directed to submit proof of GST
payment to concerned authorities - In case, GST is not found paid, Bank
Guarantee shall cover tax amount also - Bank Guarantee be furnished
within two weeks - Section 129 of Central Goods and Services Tax Act,
2017 - Article 226 of Constitution of India — Brij Gopal Gupta v. Government of
NCT of Delhi (Del.) .................................... 20
— under GST - Detention of truck containing areca nuts - Manipulation of
records and forgery of documents - HELD : As per provisions of Section
67 of Assam Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (AGST) and Sections 100
and 101 of Customs Act, 1962, process of search, seizure and confiscation,
etc., for violating any of provisions of AGST Act or Customs Act only be
initiated upon having reasons to believe by proper or appropriate officer
that person concerned involved in violation of any of provisions of GST
or Customs Act - Respondents contending documents to be either
fraudulent or containing forged signatures resulting in offences under
Sections 120B/420/467/471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Without
invoking provisions of Section 67 ibid and following procedure
prescribed therein, police authorities not to be allowed to continue with
detention and seizure of trucks on plea that some or any of the provisions
under AGST Act have been violated by assessee - If police authorities of
view that assessee required to be proceeded with or prosecuted for such
fraud or forgery simpliciter, police authorities may proceed by following
required procedure prescribed under CrPC and bring such investigation
to logical end - Any seizure effected by invoking Section 102(1) of Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ought to be subjected to procedure
prescribed under Section 102(3) ibid, i.e., to forthwith submit report of
seizure to Magistrate having jurisdiction over matter - Without such
procedure being undertaken, any detention of trucks and resultant
seizure said to be without authority and jurisdiction - Since
detained/seized areca nuts may result in bio-security threat as provided
in report of Ministry of Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, Government of
India, appropriate authorities, particularly authorities under Customs
Department may decide as to what further required to be done in respect
of detained/seized areca nuts, strictly following provisions of Customs
Act, 1962 within the period of seven days — Md. Tajal Hussain v. State of Assam
(Gau.) ......................................... 133
— under GST during transportation of goods - Delivery of goods to
consignee after expiry of time stipulated in E-Way Bill - Release of seized
goods and vehicle permissible only on furnishing a bank guarantee and
not on furnishing an indemnity bond - Assessee’s request that they are
not in a position to furnish bank guarantee, not acceptable - However,
Department directed to pass order in show cause notice issued under
Section 129(3) of Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 after
considering assessee’s original reply thereto and also the additional reply
to be submitted by them - Section 129 of Central Goods and Services Tax
Act, 2017 — Livguard Energy Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Uttarakhand
(Uttarakhand) ..................................... 145
Seizure/Detention under GST during transportation - Stricture against
Department - Value shown in invoice found to be low than MRP of goods
and HSN Code thereof also wrongly mentioned - Neither is there any
GST LAW TIMES  26th March 2020  359