Gohil Shaktisinh Girvansinh Transporter vs. State Of Gujarat

Facts

The writ applicant, Gohil Shaktisinh Girvansinh Transporter, filed a writ application challenging an order in Form GST MOV-11 dated June 10, 2019, issued by the respondent No. 2. The applicant sought the quashing of this order and the release of truck no. GJ-04-X-8728 along with its goods. A Coordinate Bench, on September 27, 2019, directed the release of the truck and goods subject to the final outcome of the petition, noting that the petitioner had already deposited Rs. 2,67,236/- against the amount computed in the confiscation order under Section 130 of the CGST Act. The petitioner also undertook to pay any differential amount if they failed in the proceedings.

Held

The Court held that it would not examine the legality and validity of the confiscation order in Form GST MOV-11 through a writ petition, as a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the CGST Act is available to the writ applicant. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ application, granting liberty to the writ applicant to prefer an appeal under Section 107 of the Act in accordance with the law. The Court clarified that if the writ applicant fails in the appeal, the differential amount will have to be paid, as observed by the Coordinate Bench. The applicant was given a period of thirty days from the date of the order to file the appeal. If no appeal is filed within this period, the concerned authority shall give effect to the earlier order of the Court dated September 27, 2019.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court should entertain a writ petition challenging a confiscation order under Section 130 of the CGST Act when a statutory remedy of appeal under Section 107 of the Act is available. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner sought the quashing of the impugned order and the release of the truck and goods. The petitioner had already deposited a significant amount and sought interim relief for the release of the vehicle and goods. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not explicitly record any specific arguments from the revenue's side regarding the maintainability of the writ petition or the merits of the confiscation order. However, the presence of the Assistant Government Pleader indicates the State's representation.