2018 (1) TMI 950 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (12) G. S. T. L. 4 (All.) – Seizure of goods – discrepancy in the quantity – also, penalty imposed on the ground that the goods, started their journey one week after the date of the invoice – Held that: – discrepancy as regards quantity has been resolved and it is accepted to the department that the quantity of goods as disclosed in the documents is the same as found on physical verification – also, reason for which penalty imposed, prima facie cannot be the ground to seize the goods or to impose penalty.
–
Subject to the petitioner furnishing security equal to the value of the goods and tax payable, in the form of indemnity bond, the vehicle along with goods shall be released in favour of
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
. The other ground of seizure on which penalty has been imposed is that the goods, started their journey one week after the date of the invoice. Prima facie that cannot be the ground to seize the goods or to impose penalty. Sri C.B.Tripathi, learned standing counsel prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file counter affidavit. Petitioner will have one week thereafter to file rejoinder affidavit. List on 24.01.2018, showing the name of Sri Prem Shankar Prasad also as counsel for the respondents. In the meanwhile, subject to the petitioner furnishing security equal to the value of the goods and tax payable, in the form of indemnity bond, the vehicle along with goods shall be released in favour of the petitioner forthwith. – Case
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =