Kiran Choubey W/O Shri Narendra Choubey vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court held that since a final order of confiscation under Section 130 of the GST Act, 2017, had been passed, and this order is appealable under Section 107 of the Act, the writ applicant should be relegated to the statutory appellate remedy. The Court directed the writ applicant to file a statutory appeal under Section 107 of the Act. Along with the appeal, it would be open for the writ applicant to prefer a Miscellaneous Application under Section 67(6) of the Act for the provisional release of the vehicle pending the final disposal of the appeal. The Court also clarified that if such an application for provisional release is filed, the concerned authority shall look into it at the earliest and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law. The Court explicitly stated that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petition.

Facts

The petitioner, Kiran Choubey, claiming to be the owner of truck bearing registration number MP-09-GF-9070, filed a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The truck was seized by Respondent No. 2 under the provisions of the GST Act, 2017. A final order in Form MOV-11 was passed, ordering the confiscation of the truck under Section 130 of the Act. The petitioner sought release of the conveyance on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation, or pending admission and disposal of the petition.

Key Issues

1. Whether the High Court, in its writ jurisdiction, should entertain a petition seeking release of a vehicle ordered for confiscation under the GST Act, 2017, when a statutory appeal remedy is available? Petitioner's contention: The petitioner, as the owner of the truck, sought the release of the vehicle on payment of fine in lieu of confiscation, or pending the disposal of the writ petition. The specific arguments made by the petitioner's counsel are not detailed in the judgment, but the prayer indicates a desire for immediate release of the vehicle. Revenue's contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the State of Gujarat or the other respondent. However, the fact that a final order of confiscation was passed implies the revenue's position was that the confiscation was justified under the law.