Petitioners have challenged order of detention and the very jurisdiction of respondent to proceed in the matter. Once the goods in question are in conformity with the documents of transit, the scope of inquiry under Section 68 of the Act of 2017 by Anti Evasion Officer/ Check Post Officer or flying squad ends
Section 129, 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit – The petitioner challenged order of detention dated 18.03.2021. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that consignment was having all requisite/prescribed documents while in transit and when the respondent intercepted the goods on 11.03.2021, all the documents such as Invoice, E-Way Bill, weighing Slip were furnished. The respondent issued notice in MOV-2 and got extension to complete inspection from the competent authority, with a view to conduct inquiry relating to alleged wrongful availment of ITC. The petitioners counsel submitted that such fishing and rowing inquiry in relation to availment of input tax credit and suspicion about the purchase transaction is not within the domain of respondent, while exercising powers under Section 68, while goods are in movement. The respondent counsel relying on section 129 submitted that on finding any violation of the provisions of the Act of 2017, the respondent is empowered to conduct inquiry and assess the tax/penalty. The court observed that once the goods in question are in conformity with the documents of transit, the scope of inquiry under Section 68 of the Act of 2017 by Anti Evasion Officer/ Check Post Officer ends. He cannot kick start an inquiry relating to the geuineness of purchase and corresponding input tax credit, which essentially relates to purchase of goods.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court issued notice and listed the matter on 19.04.2021. Further, directed the respondent to release the goods and vehicle subject to petitioner furnishing two solvent sureties of Rs. 15 lakhs. He shall not insist upon furnishing of bank guarantee or cash security.
Petitioners have challenged order of detention and the very jurisdiction of respondent to proceed in the matter. Once the goods in question are in conformity with the documents of transit, the scope of inquiry under Section 68 of the Act of 2017 by Anti Evasion Officer/ Check Post Officer or flying squad ends
Section 129, 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 — Goods in Transit – The petitioner challenged order of detention dated 18.03.2021. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that consignment was having all requisite/prescribed documents while in transit and when the respondent intercepted the goods on 11.03.2021, all the documents such as Invoice, E-Way Bill, weighing Slip were furnished. The respondent issued notice in MOV-2 and got extension to complete inspection from the competent authority, with a view to conduct inquiry relating to alleged wrongful availment of ITC. The petitioners counsel submitted that such fishing and rowing inquiry in relation to availment of input tax credit and suspicion about the purchase transaction is not within the domain of respondent, while exercising powers under Section 68, while goods are in movement. The respondent counsel relying on section 129 submitted that on finding any violation of the provisions of the Act of 2017, the respondent is empowered to conduct inquiry and assess the tax/penalty. The court observed that once the goods in question are in conformity with the documents of transit, the scope of inquiry under Section 68 of the Act of 2017 by Anti Evasion Officer/ Check Post Officer ends. He cannot kick start an inquiry relating to the geuineness of purchase and corresponding input tax credit, which essentially relates to purchase of goods.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court issued notice and listed the matter on 19.04.2021. Further, directed the respondent to release the goods and vehicle subject to petitioner furnishing two solvent sureties of Rs. 15 lakhs. He shall not insist upon furnishing of bank guarantee or cash security.