M/S Devasya Industries, Proprietor Kokilaben Sureshkumar Patel vs. State Of Gujarat

Held

The Court noted that by virtue of its order dated May 23, 2019, the truck and the goods had already been released. Regarding the notice in Form GST MOV-10 for confiscation, the Court directed the writ-applicant (petitioner) to appear before the concerned authority and present their case to demonstrate why the notice should be discharged. The Court did not decide the merits of the confiscation notice itself but rather directed the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedy. The Court disposed of the writ-application with these directions, effectively leaving the final determination of the confiscation notice to the GST authorities, while acknowledging the interim release already granted.

Facts

The petitioner, M/s Devsya Industries, proprietor Kokilaben Suresh Kumar Patel, filed a writ-application challenging a notice issued by Respondent No. 2 for the confiscation of goods and conveyance, along with a levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST Act. The petitioner also sought the release of goods and truck bearing registration No. GJ-01-DU-0888, which were detained/seized under Sections 129 and 130 of the GST Act. The High Court, by an ad-interim order dated May 23, 2019, directed the release of the detained goods and conveyance, subject to the petitioner paying the computed tax and penalty and filing a solemn undertaking to make good any deficit liability determined by the authorities. The petitioner was also required to submit proof of payment, the undertaking, and identification documents for release.

Key Issues

1. Whether the notice for confiscation of goods or conveyances and levy of penalty under Section 130 of the GST Act is liable to be quashed and set aside. 2. Whether the detained goods with truck No. GJ-01-DU-0888 are liable to be released forthwith by quashing and setting aside the detention notice. Petitioner's Arguments: The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to quash the confiscation notice under Section 130 of the GST Act and to direct the authorities to release the detained goods and truck. They relied on previous orders of the Court in similar matters (SCA No. 6125 of 2019 and SCA No. 9769 of 2019) to support their plea for interim relief. Revenue's Arguments: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue or state authorities. However, the ad-interim order indicates that the respondents were directed to release the goods subject to certain conditions, implying their participation in the proceedings.