GST – Madras High Court: Pursuant to detention, the consequential order was passed by Revenue beyond the period of seven days from the date of service of notice on the petitioner which is contrary to section 129(3), hence both the detention order and consequential order are quashed – Writ Petition allowed [Order attached]
Parties: Deepam Roadways Vs The Deputy State Tax Officer, The State Tax Officer, The Assistant Commissioner (ST)
Order Date – 23 January 2023
- The Petitioner, Deepam Roadways, was issued with a notice on 31.10.2022 within seven days from the date of detention. The consequential order for payment of penalty was passed only on 10.11.2022 and Imposed penalty under section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017.
- Whether section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was adhered to by the respondents or not?
- The Hon’ble High Court held that the consequential order was passed beyond the period of seven days from the date of service of notice on the petitioner which is contrary to section 129(3) of the CGST Act, 2017.
- Relying on the decision of this Court in the case of Udhayam Steels Private Limited vs. Deputy Tax Officer (Int.) and another and D.K. Enterprises vs. The Assistant/Deputy Commissioner and another, the Court held that the impugned detention order dated 31.10.2022 as well as the impugned consequential order dated 10.11.2022 are hereby quashed and the writ petitions are allowed and a direction is issued to the respondents to release the detained goods and conveyances.