2019 (1) TMI 86 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 7 (All.) – Seizure of goods – imposition of penalty under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act – details of the purchasers/buyers situated at different places in Kanpur are incomplete, as has been mentioned both in invoices as well as in goods receipt – maintainability of petition – Held that:- There are several disputed question of facts involved in the present writ petition and in our opinion the same can be appropriately adjudicated by the authorities including the appellate authority – the petitioner has not disputed that the impugned order is appealable.
–
There are no hesitation to dismiss the writ petition at this stage with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropria
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
eized in question are sold to various parties who are not registered with the UPGST Authorities. The details of the purchasers/buyers situated at different places in Kanpur are incomplete, as has been mentioned both in invoices as well as in goods receipt. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly accepted that all the purchasers/buyers situated at Kanpur are unregistered. The identity of buyers is completely doubtful. The respondent no.4 has proceeded to initiate the proceedings under Section 129(1) of UPGST after detaining the goods and vehicle on 12.4.2018 by clearly mentioning the documents which are produced by the truck driver and further has reached to the conclusion that the goods mentioned in the invoices and G.Rs. are 'PA
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =