Page 138 - GSTL_18th June 2020_Vol 37_Part 3

352 GST LAW TIMES [ Vol. 37
2020 (37) G.S.T.L. 352 (Commr. Appl. - GST - Raj.)

BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF GST (APPEALS), JAIPUR
Shri J.P. Meena, Additional Commissioner (Appeals)
IN RE : GANESH CERAMICS
Order-in-Appeal No. 28(JPM)CGST/JPR/2020, dated 27-1-2020
in Application C. No. APPL/JPR/CGST/AL/60/XII/2019
Seizure/Detention of goods and vehicle in transit - Excess goods (tiles)
and undervaluation of goods - Appellant himself and person in-charge of the
conveyance confessed and duly acknowledged the proceedings of the Adjudi-
cating Authority and waived any personal hearing and notice in the matter -
Quantity mentioned in Tax Invoice, E-way Bill and Challan is 685 boxes only
and nothing mentioned about excess quantity of boxes supporting appellant’s
claim of free scheme - Appellants themselves requested the Adjudicating Au-
thority to release the goods and vehicle after deposition of GST, penalty & re-
demption fine as determined in the impugned order - Value determined by the
Adjudicating Authority not challenged by appellant but deposited the same as
determined - Demand, fine and penalty upheld - Sections 68(3) and 129 of Cen-
tral Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. [para 6]
Appeal rejected
[Order]. - This appeal has been filed under Section 107 of the Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 by M/s. Ganesh Ceramics, East of 70 Fit, IOC Road, Patna
(Bihar) (hereinafter also referred to as “the appellant”) against Order dated
10-10-2018 (hereinafter referred to as “the impugned order”) passed by Assistant
Commissioner (Anti-Evasion), Central Goods & Services Tax Commissionerate,
Alwar (hereinafter also referred to as “the adjudicating authority”).
Brief facts of the case :-
2.1 The brief facts of the case are that the appellant is having GSTIN
No. 10AHNPV9499A1ZX engaged in business of trading activities in Ceramic
Tiles. On 9-10-2018 at 9.45 AM at Sikandara Toll Plaza at NH 11, the officers of
CGST Division, Sikar had intercepted in movement [of] the appellant’s convey-
ance bearing Regn. No. RJ19 GD 7222. The statement of the Driver/person in-
charge was also recorded on 9-10-2018. The goods in movement were inspected
under the provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 68 of the Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 and following discrepancies were found :-
(a) 671 Boxes of Tiles containing 4 tiles in each were found in excess.
(b) Bill was generated on undervaluation with intent to evade tax. Dur-
ing physical verification, it was found that MRP of boxes were
marked as Rs. 600/- but the transaction value shown in Invoice was
only Rs. 170/- per box.
2.2 In view of the above, the impugned goods and the conveyance used
for the movement of goods were without any valid documents accordingly the
same were detained under sub-section (1) of Section 129 of Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 read with sub-section (3) of Section 68 of the Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 by issuing an order of detention in FORM
GST MOV-06. As the appellant has not objected and refused for any notice and
personal hearing in the instant case. Accordingly, the adjudicating authority has
passed the impugned order. The adjudicating authority apart from confirming
GST LAW TIMES  18th June 2020  138