BharatTaxGST

M/S Jupiter Express Carrier (P) Limited vs. Union Of INDIA

Original PDF →
WP/4471/2022HC KarnatakaGSTCNR KAHC01030534202123 September 2022Bench: S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR5 pages
For Petitioner: SRI. GOVINDRAYA KAMATH.K., ADVOCATEFor Respondent: SRI. JEEVAN.J. NEERALAGI., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2 SRI. HEMA KUMAR., AGA FOR R-3 TO R-5

No AI summary yet for this judgment.

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.4471 OF 2022(T-RES) BETWEEN: M/S JUPITER EXPRESS CARRIER (P) LIMITED (INCORPORATED UNDER COMPANIES ACT) NO.2/29, JAWAHARNAGAR, OPP JAWAHAR ENCL AVENUE, JAIPUR, RAJASTHAN, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, SRI JAGDISH KUMAR SOOD, S/O.BANARASI DAS SOOD, AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. GOVINDRAYA KAMATH.K., ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, HAVING ITS OFFICE AT, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110001. 2 . UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS GST POLICY WING, NEW DELHI-110002. 3 . STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY UNDER SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, BENGALURU-560001. 2 4 . COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES KARNATAKA) VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAYA-1, GANDHINAGAR, BANGALORE-560009. 5 . COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER (VIGILANCE)-12, 3RD FLOOR, VANIJYA TERIGE KARYALAY-2, A BLOCK, VIVEKNAGAR, KORAMANGALA, BENGALURU-560 047. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. JEEVAN.J. NEERALAGI., ADVOCATE FOR R-1 & R-2 SRI. HEMA KUMAR., AGA FOR R-3 TO R-5) THIS W.P. IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THE IMPUGNED SECTION 129 OF THE CENTRAL GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT CGST ACT, 2017 AND SECTION 129 OF THE KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT KGST ACT, 2017 AS ILLEGAL, ULTRA VIRES AND VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14, 19 AND 21 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND ETC. THIS W.P. COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

In this petition, the petitioners have sought for the following reliefs: a. Declare the impugned Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act “CGST Act”, 2017 and Section 129 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act “KGST Act”, 2017 as illegal, ultra vires and Violative of Article 14, 19, 21 of the Constitution of India. b. Declare the impugned Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act “CGST Act”, 2017 and Section 130 of the Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act “KGST Act”, 2017 as illegal,

3 ultra vires and violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. c. Declare that clause (I) of Circular No.41/15/2018-GST dated 13.4.2018 as per Annexure-A issued by 2nd Respondent as illegal, ultra vires and Violative of Article 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India. d. To set aside the order of Confiscation bearing No.JCCT-VIG/CTO-12/2020-21 dated 15.3.2021 as per Annexure-A1 passed by the 5th Respondent under Section 130 of the Karnataka Goods and Services tax Act “KGST Act”, 2017 and under Section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act “CGST”, 2017/under Section 20 of the Integrated Goods and Services Tax (Compensation to States) Act, 2017, by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other writ in the nature of certiorari; or e. To grant any other relief/(s) this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned AGA for respondent Nos.3 to 5 and perused the material on record.

4

3.

On 16.09.2022, this Court passed the following order: “After having heard both sides, without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions and by way of interim arrangement I deem it just and proper to direct the petitioner to file an affidavit before the respondent No. 5 - CTO in terms of Section 130(1) sub-clause (v) of GST Act stating that the subject vehicle was used without his knowledge or connivance with M/s. Bright Road Logistics. The said affidavit shall be filed by the petitioner on 19.09.2022 pursuant to which, the respondent No. 5 - CTO shall pass appropriate orders regarding release of the subject vehicle in favour of the petitioner on or before 22.09.2022. Re-list on 23.09.2022 under the caption `Orders'.”

4.

Today, learned AGA has filed a memo along with a copy of the release order dated 22.09.2022 passed by the respondents pursuant to the aforesaid interim order passed by this Court.

5.

Said memo and release order are placed on record.

5

6.

In view of the aforesaid release order passed by the respondents in favour of the petitioner, nothing further survives in the petition and the same is accordingly disposed of without expressing any opinion on the merits/demerits of the rival contentions on all aspects of the matter including any of the orders passed by the respondents.

All rival contentions are kept open and no opinion is expressed on the same. JUDGE

Bmc

Reproduced from the public record of the Karnataka High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.