Order Date – 07 May 2025

Parties: M/s Srinivas Traders Vs The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax Circle and Others

Facts –

• The Petitioner, M/s Srinivas Traders, challenged the detention of goods-in-transit across five different consignments, despite all consignments being covered by valid tax invoices and E-Way Bills.
• The detentions were made without specific reasons and the authorities failed to issue mandatory notice under Section 129(3) of the CGST Act within the prescribed 7-day period, and instead, proceeded directly to initiate proceedings under Section 130.

Issue –

• Whether the detention of goods-in-transit without issuing a proper notice and without recording specific reasons is valid?

Order –

• The Divisional Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that the documents produced, do not show any notice being issued under Section 129 of G.S.T Act, notices produced by the learned Government Pleader are notices that are to be issued under Section 130 of G.S.T. Act. A perusal of the seizure memo would also show that no legible reasons for seizure have been set out in the said notices.
• The law in this regard is well settled by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mohinder Singh Gill & Anr vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, that additional reasons cannot be supplemented after the impugned order had been passed.
• Writ Petitions are disposed of with directing the the concerned authorities, who had seized the goods of the petitioner, shall issue a notice under Section 129(3) of G.S.T Act.