Titagarh Wagons Limited And Anr vs. Union Of INDIA, Through The Comiisioner (GST) And Ors

Facts

The petitioners, Titagarh Wagons Limited & Anr., are the owners of goods that have been detained. They have filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the release of these goods. The petitioners are willing to pay the penalty as stipulated in the impugned adjudication order and wish to be allowed to file an appeal against it. The impugned adjudication order was passed by a respondent authority under the WBGST Act. The specific tax period and the amount in dispute are not explicitly stated in the judgment. The procedural history involves the detention of goods and the passing of an adjudication order, leading to the present writ petition.

Held

The Court directed the proper officer of the respondent authority to release the goods in question. This release is contingent upon the petitioners making an application for the release of the goods, subject to factual verification of their ownership. The release will be effected under the relevant provisions of Section 129 of the WBGST Act. The goods are to be released within three days from the date of payment of the penalty or any other revenue dues arising from the impugned adjudication order. Furthermore, the petitioners are granted liberty to file an appeal against the impugned adjudication order in accordance with law, if they are aggrieved. The respondent authority is to act upon the communication of the gist of this order by the petitioner's learned advocate-on-record. No issue was expressly left undecided.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to a direction for the release of their goods upon payment of the penalty and other revenue dues as per the impugned adjudication order, and to file an appeal against the said order? (Mixed question of law and fact, concerning the interpretation and application of Section 129 of the WBGST Act and principles of natural justice). Petitioner's Contention: The petitioners argued that they are the owners of the goods and are ready to comply with the adjudication order by paying the penalty. They further contended that they should be permitted to file an appeal against the adjudication order. They sought a direction from the Court for the release of the goods. Revenue/State's Contention: The judgment records that learned advocates appearing for the parties were heard. No specific arguments were recorded for the revenue or the State, other than their presence and participation in the hearing.