The respondent Department has rightly proceeded in the matter by taking notice action under Section 130 of the GST Act,2017 as the goods i.e., gold jewellery were being supplied and received in contravention of the provisions of the GST Act and Rules made thereunder, with intend to avoid payment of tax.
Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017--- Seizure of Goods -- The Petitioner prayed for a direction to quash and set aside the confiscation of goods and release such goods to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted that goods were seized and detained by the respondent and they were duty bound to issue notice as envisaged under Section 129(3) but the respondent resorted to the provisions of Section 130 of the Act and there is no basis for coming to prima facie conclusion that there was an attempt on the part of the petitioner to evade payment of tax. The respondent counsel submitted that the petition is devoid of merit as Mens rea is an essential part for an action under Section 130 of the Act. The court observed that Section 130 deals with mens rea of a person who intends to avoid payment of taxes. The petitioner has not submitted any documents to substantiate his claim. The writ petition is totally devoid of merits.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petition.
The respondent Department has rightly proceeded in the matter by taking notice action under Section 130 of the GST Act,2017 as the goods i.e., gold jewellery were being supplied and received in contravention of the provisions of the GST Act and Rules made thereunder, with intend to avoid payment of tax.
Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017--- Seizure of Goods -- The Petitioner prayed for a direction to quash and set aside the confiscation of goods and release such goods to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted that goods were seized and detained by the respondent and they were duty bound to issue notice as envisaged under Section 129(3) but the respondent resorted to the provisions of Section 130 of the Act and there is no basis for coming to prima facie conclusion that there was an attempt on the part of the petitioner to evade payment of tax. The respondent counsel submitted that the petition is devoid of merit as Mens rea is an essential part for an action under Section 130 of the Act. The court observed that Section 130 deals with mens rea of a person who intends to avoid payment of taxes. The petitioner has not submitted any documents to substantiate his claim. The writ petition is totally devoid of merits.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court dismissed the petition.