Sanal P vs. The Assistant Commissioner - Karnataka High Court, 23 January 2023

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

- 1 - WP NO.100473 OF 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO.100473 OF 2023 (T-RES) BETWEEN: 1. SANAL P AGED 44 YEARS, S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR M, PROPRIETOR ADITHY EXIM, 336 SITE NO. 1538/N, ADITHYA EXIM, 2ND BLOCK, AREKERE, BTM LAYOUT STAGE 4 BENGALURU URBAN KARNATAKA 560076 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. ASHWIN GOPAKUMAR, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENFORCEMENT) THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (ENFORCEMENT) GOKAK, GOVERNMENT BUILDING, MARKADAIAHNAGAR, PALS ROAD, GOKAK 591307 …RESPONDENT (BY SRI SHIVAPABHU S. HIREMATH, AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO, FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS TO BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS HUMBLY PRAYED THAT THIS HON BLE COURT BE PLEASED TO CALL FOR RECORDS LEADING TO ANNEXURE-A TO E AND, (I) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER AND QUASH - 2 - WP NO.100473 OF 2023 ANNEXURE-E BEARING NO.ACCT(ENF)/GKK/VIG-34/22-23 DTD.26/12/22 ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ARISING THEREFROM, AND (II) ISSUE A WRIT OF CERTIORARI OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER AND QUASH ANNEXURE-G BEARING NO.VATESAAA/JYARI/GO/ADIKE/HARAJU/2022-23/ DTD 19/1/23 PUBLIC AUCTION NOTICE ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AND ALL FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ARISING THEREFROM, AND (III) ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR SUCH WRIT, DIRECTION OR ORDER COMMANDING THE RESPONDENT TO IMMEDIATELY RELEASE THE CONSIGNMENT WEIGHING 11995 KGS OF ARECA NUTS ILLEGALLY CONFISCATED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER, AND (IV) TO GRANT SUCH OTHER AND INCIDENTAL RELIEFS AS THIS HON BLE COURT MAY DEEM FIT, JUST AND NECESSARY IN THE PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THIS CASE THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

Learned Additional Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondent.

Petitioner in this petition is aggrieved by the order Form GST MOV-11 dated 26th December, 2022, being an order of confiscation under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 read with relevant provisions of the State State/Union Territory Goods and Services Tax Act/The integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017. The petitioner, inter alia, has stated that confiscated agricultural produce-areca nut is highly perishable and any delay in release of goods from WP NO.100473 OF 2023

respondent’s custody will cause decaying of the goods and would have serious financial implication on the petitioner.

Sri Shivaprabhu S. Hiremath, learned Additional Government Advocate raised preliminary objections to the impugned order submitting that the impugned order is an appealable order under Section 107 of the Goods and Services Act, 2017 and therefore, the petition cannot be accepted.

Sri Aswin Gopakumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the impugned order passed by the respondent authority, per se, is contrary to the law declared by this Court in other proceedings, has set aside such orders passed by the competent authority and therefore sought for interference of this Court in this writ petition.

It is useful to refer to Section 107 of the CGST/KGST Act. The same reads thus: “Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Act, 2017 (CGST Act) Appeals to Appellate Authority (1) Any person aggrieved by any decision or order passed under this Act or the State Goods and Services Tax Act or the Union Territory Goods and Services Tax WP NO.100473 OF 2023

Act by an adjudicating authority may appeal to such Appellate Authority as may be prescribed within three months from the date on which the said decision or order is communicated to such person.” (emphasis supplied)

Having heard the learned Additional Government Advocate that the order impugned herein is an appealable order under Section 107 of the Act, I am of the view that the petitioner is having an alternative and efficacious remedy provided under the Act. In that view of the matter, without considering the matter on merits the writ petition is disposed of reserving liberty to the petition to avail such remedy, as provided under the Act. Petition accordingly disposed of. JUDGE

LNN List No.: 2 Sl No.: 1