2018 (12) TMI 890 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – TMI – Release of goods – contention of petitioner is that despite the fact that the petitioner has deposited the entire amount of proposed tax and penalty in accordance with Section 129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 still the goods are not being released – Held that:- The respondent no. 4 has no authority in law to dictate respondent no. 3 in such a manner. Issuance of such direction by respondent no. 4 is blatantly illegal and without any authority of law.
–
The Custom Department has not passed any order of detention/confiscation of the said goods under the Customs Act.
–
The respondents directed to release the goods and vehicle in favour of the petitioner forthwith and report about the
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
n of the petitioner or the selling dealer is fictitious or that it has been cancelled or revoked. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that despite the fact that the petitioner has deposited the entire amount of proposed tax and penalty in accordance with Section 129(1)(a) of the U.P. GST Act, 2017 still the goods are not being released. It appears from the documents produced by the respondents especially Sri R.C. Shukla, counsel for the respondent no. 4 that the goods have not been released as the respondent no. 4 has issued directions to the respondent no. 3 not to release the goods and not to give the same in custody of the Custom Department. Ex-facie we find that the respondent no. 4 has no authority in law to dictate
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =