Order Date – 15 July 2025 

Parties:  M/s Arora Auto Center v. State of U.P. And 2 Others

Facts –

• The petitioner, M/s Arora Auto Center, was transporting batteries to Muzaffarnagar, but the goods were found being unloaded at an unregistered location not mentioned in the GST registration, leading to their detention on 06.03.2020.
• The petitioner applied to add the premises as an additional place of business only on 07.03.2020. The department proceeded with penalty under Section 129.

Issue –

• Whether an amendment of GST registration filed even after detaining the goods be valid under Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017?

Order –

• The Single Bench of the Hon’ble High Court observed that It is a case where after the detention of the goods, the application has been moved for adding the additional place of business so as to escape the wrath of the consequence of Section 129 of the Act of 2017 which has a strict rigor and starts with a non obstante clause.
• Moreover, written argument filed before appellate authority reflects that application for additional place of business was not moved during the transit of goods and it was only after the goods were detained on 06.03.2020.
• It is a classic case where application for adding additional place of business was moved after the goods were detained to avoid the penal consequence as provided under the Act of 2017. Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.