Corp Mediteche Private Limited Versus State of U.P. And Another
GST
2018 (8) TMI 281 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 645 (All.) , [2018] 59 G S.T.R. 350 (All)
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 31-7-2018
Writ Tax No. 1049 of 2018
GST
Hon'ble Ashok Kumar, J.
\nFor the Petitioner : Nishant Mishra
\nFor the Respondent : C. S. C.
\nORDER
\nLearned counsel for the petitioner has prayed and is allowed to implead the Union of India and GST Council as respondent nos. 3 and 4 respectively.
\nHeard Sri Nishant Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel.
\nAs prayed by Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel, two weeks' time is allowed to file the reply\/counter affidavit.
\nThe contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the entire seizure proceedings is invalid and without authority of law.
\nLearned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Government Orders and forms which are necessary<\/p>\n
= = = = = = = =<\/p>\n
Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n eveals that when the vehicle in question was detained at 03:30 am on 22.05.2018, the tax invoice and other documents accompanying the goods were produced by the person in charge\/driver of the vehicle. The explanation was given by the driver that he was not aware about the required procedure that part-B of the E-way bill is also to be downloaded. However he has downloaded the same and placed it on the same day i.e. on 22.05.2018 at 10:56 am. The detaining authority, however has proceeded to seize the goods and to issue a notice under Section 129 (3) of the CGST Act. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n unal, learned Standing Counsel has informed that so far as no Tribunal is established. = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n Plain text (Extract) only<\/strong> = = = = = = = =<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Corp Mediteche Private Limited Versus State of U.P. And AnotherGST2018 (8) TMI 281 – ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – 2018 (15) G. S. T. L. 645 (All.) , [2018] 59 G S.T.R. 350 (All)ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT – HCDated:- 31-7-2018Writ Tax No. 1049 of 2018 GSTHon'ble Ashok Kumar, J. For the Petitioner : Nishant Mishra For the … Continue reading “Corp Mediteche Private Limited Versus State of U.P. And Another”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-13055","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13055","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=13055"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13055\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=13055"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=13055"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/goodsandservicetax.in\/GST\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=13055"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nThe petitioner has furnished the reply to the show cause notice and explained therein that he was neither any ill intention nor the goods are meant for sale within the State of U.P. as such the goods are meant for to be supplied to the Medical Colleges, situated at Madhya Pradesh and all the details are duly incorporated in the documents, i.e. the details of the purchaser medical college being HLL Infra Tech Services Ltd. (<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n
\nThis Court in fact has requested for forming of the Tribunal long back while entertaining the writ petitions against the seizure proceedings. Surprisingly, even after a specific order of this Court the concern authority has not acted upon and till date no Tribunal is established.
\nThis issue is now serious as because of non establishment of the Tribunal, the parties are unnecessarily approaching this Court whereas, in case of establishment of Tribunal they can easily file the appeal under Section 112 of the Act.
\nIssue notice to the newly added respondent nos. 3 and 4, Union of India and Goods & Service Tax Council to explain as to why the previous orders of this Court are not complied with and as to why the statutory Tribunal is not setup so far. This explanation must be furnished within two weeks by the respondents.
\nSection 113 of the CGST Act, provides the procedure to be applied by the Appellat<\/p>\n
For full text:-Visit the Source <\/a><\/p>\n