Page 163 - GSTL_2nd April 2020_Vol 35_Part 1

2020 ] ABB INDIA LIMITED v. UNION OF INDIA 65
2. Having heard the Learned Counsel appearing for the parties and hav-
ing gone through the materials on record, we are of the view that the writ-
applicant has made out a strong prima facie case to have some interim order
in its favour.
3. There are many larger issues, which have been raised for the purpose of
adjudication of this Court. Today, we are concerned with the issue whether
we should order release of the goods and the conveyance detained and
seized by the GST authority.
4. We take notice of the fact that there are in all four vehicles involved in
this matter. The goods are in the nature of electrical goods. It appears that a
notice under Section 129(3) of the Act i.e. GST-MOV-07 came to be issued
calling upon the writ applicant to appear before the authority concerned on
31st December, 2019.
5. The Learned Counsel appearing for the writ applicant brings to our no-
tice that yesterday his client has received the order in GST MOV-09. The to-
tal liability towards the tax and penalty plus interest as fixed comes to
around Rs. 1,00,81,944/.
6. The legal issues, which have been raised by the Learned Counsel ap-
pearing for the writ-applicant shall be heard and decided on the returnable
date. However, we are inclined to pass an interim order for the release of
the goods and the vehicles. We direct the writ-applicant to deposit an
amount of Rs. 50,40,972/ towards the tax with the Respondent No. 2 and
the balance amount of Rs. 50,40,972/towards the penalty shall be in the
form of a bank guarantee of any nationalized bank. On deposit of the requi-
site amount and the bank guarantee, the authority concerned shall release
the goods and the vehicles forthwith.
Direct service is permitted.”
4. The subject matter of challenge in the main matter is the notice, is-
sued by the authority, under Section 129(3) of the Act i.e. Form GST-MOV-07 as
well as the order passed by the authority in Form GST-MOV-09.
5. By way of an ad-interim-order, we directed the applicant herein to
deposit an amount of Rs. 50,40,972/- towards tax, with the Respondent No. 2 and
an amount of Rs. 50,40,972/- towards the penalty, in the form of the Bank Guar-
antee of any Nationalized Bank.
6. It is not in dispute that our order, dated 10-1-2020, has been fully
complied with by the applicant herein. However, surprisingly, a notice dated 5th
February, 2020, in Form GST-MOV-10, came to be issued. In all, four separate
notices, in Form GST-MOV-10, came to be issued for four different vehicles.
7. We find one such notice, in Form GST-MOV-10, at page No. 58 of the
application, wherein, in paragraph No. 4, the following has been stated :
“Subsequently, after observing the principles of natural justice, an order
demanding the applicable tax and penalty was issued in FORM GST MOV-
09 on 9-1-2020 and the same was served on (i) Shri Kapil Thapa, the person
in charge of the conveyance and (ii) Shri Kuldip Singh Lamba (Authorized
person of M/s. ABB India Limited). Being aggrieved by the order in GST
MOV-09, dated 9-1-2020 issued by the Assistant Commissioner (Preven-
tive), CGST HQ, Kutch Commissionerate, Gandhidham. The Hon’ble High
Court of Gujarat passed an interim order in this case on dated 10-1-2020,
without giving any stay and issued only direction to the petitioner as well
as to the department as stated in Para 6 of the order dated 10-1-2020 where-
in Hon’ble Court has directed the petitioner to deposit an amount of
Rs. 50,40,972/- towards tax and the balance amount of Rs. 50,40,972/-
GST LAW TIMES  2nd April 2020  227