Page 126 - GSTL_21st May 2020_Vol 36_Part 3

372 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 36
Provided that no such goods or conveyance shall be detained
or seized without serving an order of detention or seizure on
the person transporting the goods.
(2) The provisions of sub-section (6) of section 67 shall, mutatis mutandis,
apply for detention and seizure of goods and conveyances.
(3) The proper officer detaining or seizing goods or conveyances shall is-
sue a notice specifying the tax and penalty payable and thereafter, pass an
order for payment of tax and penalty under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause
(c).
(4) No tax, interest or penalty shall be determined under sub-section (3)
without giving the person concerned an opportunity of being heard.
(5) On payment of amount referred in sub-section (1), all proceedings in
respect of the notice specified in sub-section (3) shall be deemed to be con-
cluded.
(6) Where the person transporting any goods or the owner of the goods
fails to pay the amount of tax and penalty as provided in sub-section (1)
within seven days of such detention or seizure, further proceedings shall be
initiated in accordance with the provisions of section 130 :
Provided that where the detained or seized goods are perishable or hazard-
ous in nature or are likely to depreciate in value with passage of time, the
said period of seven days may be reduced by the proper officer.”
6. On a plain and simple reading of the provisions of the Act, sub-
section (3) of Section 129 envisages that the proper officer detaining or seizing
goods or conveyances shall issue a notice specifying the tax and penalty payable
and thereafter, pass an order for payment of tax and penalty under clause (a) or
clause (b) or clause (c) and on payment of the amount referred to in sub-section
(1) all the proceedings in respect of notice specified in sub-section (3) shall be
again to be concluded. The expression ‘order’ used in sub-section (3) can in
common wording can construed to be an order. The litigants do not have the ac-
umen of legalities of the order particularly when the word ‘order’ is reflected in
sub-section (3).
7. The appeal was filed on 11-10-2018 and the adjudication order dated
21-11-2018 was issued during the pendency of the appeal. The appeal could have
been rectified by an amendment appropriately to be against the adjudication or-
der. The authorities ought not to have adopted a rigid approach and rejected the
appeal as not maintainable. At the best request of the petitioner could have been
construed in the manner for the amendment of the appeal, challenging the adju-
dication order in order to overcome the maintainability of the appeal.
8. For the reason aforementioned, the impugned order Ext.P8, dated
14-8-2019 received on 13-11-2019 is set aside. Appeal is restored granting liberty
to the petitioner to challenge the order dated 21-11-2018 (Ext.P9) in accordance
with law.
9. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

_______

GST LAW TIMES  21st May 2020  126