2018 (8) TMI 67 – KERALA HIGH COURT – TMI – Detention of goods – efficacious alternative remedy u/s 107 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act – Held that:- Nevertheless, the petitioner has agreed to provide the Bank guarantee as mandated under Rule 140 of the CGST Rules and to have the goods released, subject to the departmental proceedings now initiated through Ext.P7 – the respondent will release the petitioner's goods on its providing the Bank guarantee for the value of the goods as mentioned in Ext.P7 – petition allowed. – W.P.(C). No. 25030 of 2018 (C) Dated:- 27-7-2018 – MR. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. For The Petitioner : Sri. P.M. Poulose And Sri.P.D. Broono For The Respondent : Smt. Thushara James JUDGMENT The petitioner, a partne
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
Nevertheless, the petitioner has agreed to provide the Bank guarantee as mandated under Rule 140 of the CGST Rules and to have the goods released, subject to the departmental proceedings now initiated through Ext.P7. 4. In response to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader has submitted that if the petitioner is willing to provide the Bank guarantee for the value of the goods as estimated in Ext.P7, the respondent has no objection to release the goods. She has also submitted that the Department can as well proceed under Ext.P7 and conclude the proceedings. 5. Under these circumstances, I hold that the respondent will release the petitioner's goods on its providing the Bank guarant
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =