Case Details: Haresh Kumar v. Assistant Commissioner (ST) - [2023] 150 taxmann.com 380 (Madras)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- C. Saravanan, J.
- G. Natarajan for the Petitioner.
- C. Harsharaj for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
The assessee had transported consignment of goods accompanied by invoice and an e-way bill, which was intercepted and detained by the department. The goods were detained on the ground that the supplier, from whom the assessee purchased the goods, had wrongly passed on the Input Tax Credit and thereby entailing the assessee to avail and utilize the same for discharging tax liability on the supplies made by the supplier.
It filed writ petition for release on goods and submitted that the movement of goods was in accordance with provisions GST Act and a statutory appeal under Section 107 was filed before Appellate Authority after payment of 25% of disputed penalty.
High Court Held
The Honorable High Court noted that once order was stayed, the goods could be released subject to such other safeguards that may be imposed by Appellate Authorities. The officer who detained goods became functus officio, once there was a mandatory pre-deposit and order had no force and all further recovery proceedings would be subject to final outcome of appeal.
Therefore, the Court directed the assessee to deposit maximum penalty of 200% of tax to safeguard interest of revenue after adjusting amount already deposited or furnish Bank Guarantee in terms of Section 129(c). The Court also held that the goods should be released on furnishing Bank Guarantee for balance amount of penalty or payment of same in cash.
The post Detained Goods to be Released on Furnishing Bank Guarantee or 200% Cash Payment: HC appeared first on Taxmann Blog.
