Page 125 - GSTL_21st May 2020_Vol 36_Part 3
P. 125

2020 ]      FAWAS ASSOCIATED AGENCIES v. ASSTT. STATE TAX OFFICER    371
               detention of the vehicle and the goods can be construed to be an adjudication
               order as per the provisions of Section 129(5) of the CGST Act, 2017 & Kerala State
               GST Act, 2017 (for short, ‘the Act’) or not. In order to answer the aforementioned
               question the facts in brief are factualised as under :
                       Petitioner being a registered dealer under the Central Goods and Service
               Tax Act, 2017 while transporting two consignments of TMT steel in a Goods Ve-
               hicle from Perumbavoor to Muvattupuzha supported by invoices Exts.P1 & P1(a)
               and Exts.P2 & P2(a) e-way bills were detained on 27-9-2018 alleging that the e-
               way bills were not valid as the number of the vehicle in Part-B of the e-way bills
               was not entered.
                       2.  Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that considering the no-
               tice and particularly the opening line of the same to be as an order, the petitioner
               preferred an appeal under Section 107 of the aforementioned Act, where the limi-
               tation is three months, but condonable is only one month. That  appeal is dis-
               missed vide Ext.P8, dated 14-8-2019 received on 13-11-2019 as the notice was not
               appealable. Ext.P9 adjudication order dated 21-11-2018 was passed, pending the
               appeal and therefore, is not maintainable.
                       3.  Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State submits that ap-
               peal could have been filed only against Ext.P9 and not against Ext.P4.
                       4.  Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the only prayer in
               the present writ petition is for restoration of the appeal granting liberty to them.
                       5.  Having heard the Counsel for the parties  and perused the paper
               book, I am of the view that this is a fit case where interference under Article 226
               of the Constitution of India is warranted. Section 129 of the Act reads as under :
                       “129.  Detention, seizure and release of goods and  conveyances in
                       transit. - (1)  Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any
                       person transports any goods or stores any goods while they are in transit in
                       contravention of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder, all
                       such goods and conveyance used as a means of transport for carrying the
                       said goods and documents relating to such goods and conveyance shall be
                       liable to detention or seizure and after detention or seizure, shall be re-
                       leased, -
                            (a)  on payment of the applicable tax and penalty equal to one
                                 hundred per cent of the tax  payable on such goods and, in
                                 case of exempted goods, on payment of an amount equal to
                                 two per cent of the value of  goods or twenty-five thousand
                                 rupees, whichever is less, where the owner of the goods comes
                                 forward for payment of such tax and penalty;
                            (b)  on payment of the applicable tax and penalty equal to the fifty
                                 per cent of the value of the goods reduced by the tax amount
                                 paid thereon and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of
                                 an amount equal to five per cent, of the value of goods  or
                                 twenty five thousand rupees,  whichever is less, where the
                                 owner of the  goods does not come forward for payment of
                                 such tax and penalty;
                            (c)   upon furnishing a security equivalent to the amount payable
                                 under clause (a) or clause (b) in such form and manner as may
                                 be prescribed :
                                     GST LAW TIMES      21st May 2020      125
   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130