Arvind Kumar vs. The Assistant Commisioner F Tate Tax And Others
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Arvind Kumar, is the driver of a vehicle that was intercepted. He filed a writ petition seeking the release of the vehicle under the first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act. The petitioner expressed willingness to pay the penalty stipulated by this provision, but intended to challenge the imposition of the penalty before an appropriate forum. The State, represented by the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Goods and Services Tax Bureau of Investigation, was the respondent.
Held
The Court directed the concerned authority to release the vehicle within three working days from the date the petitioner pays the penalty as per the first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act. Regarding the imposition of the penalty itself, as detailed in Annexure P-8, the Court held that the petitioner is at liberty to agitate the matter before the appropriate forum. The Court did not decide on the validity or legality of the penalty, only on the release of the vehicle upon payment of the penalty amount as per the specified proviso.
Key Issues
1. Whether the petitioner is entitled to the release of the vehicle upon payment of penalty as per the first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act, subject to a future challenge of the penalty itself? The petitioner argued that he is entitled to release of the vehicle by paying the penalty as per the first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act, while reserving his right to challenge the penalty's imposition later. The State's contentions were not explicitly recorded in the judgment.
Sections Cited
Section 129(6)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2023. Hearquarters & Ors. Mrs. Rita Mukherjee, Mr. G. Jha, Mr. Rowsan Kr. Jha. ……..for the petitioner. Mr. A. Ray, Mr. S. Mukherjee, Mr. D. Ghosh, Mr. D. Sahu. ………for the State. Heard both the parties. Petitioner being the driver of the vehicle in question files this writ petition for release of the same under the first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act by agreeing to pay the penalty as per the aforesaid statutory provisions. However, petitioner wants to pay the penalty as per the aforesaid proviso subject to challenge the same before the appropriate forum. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case as appears from record and submission of the parties, this writ petition being WPA 1184 of 2023 is disposed of by directing the authority concerned to release the vehicle in question within three working days from the date of 2 payment of penalty by the petitioner as per first proviso to Section 129(6) of the WBGST and CGST Act and so far as the imposition of penalty, both the WBGST and CGST as per Annexure P-8 to the writ petition is concerned, petitioner is at liberty to agitate the same before the appropriate forum. (Md. Nizamuddin, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.