CASE NAME – Ranchi Carrying Corporation Vs State of U.P. And 2 Others (Allahabad High Court)
APPEAL NUMBER – Writ Tax No. 655 of 2020
DATE OF JUDGEMENT – 07/12/2020
FACT OF CASE
FORM MOV-06 (Order of detention of goods or conveyance) and FORM MOV-07 (Notice specifying tax and penalty amount payable) were served to the driver of the truck however, FORM MOV-09 dated January 1, 2020 for demand, tax and penalty related to the goods was served by affixing the same on the truck.
The Petitioner contended that serving of the notices to the driver or fixation of the copy of the order on the truck in question is none of the methods prescribed under Section 169 Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”) and thus it is clear that the orders/ notices were never served and the proceedings were held ex-parte.
Further, stated that the Petitioner submitted requisite documents at the time of appeal to the Respondent but the Respondent held that as no reply was filed to the notices sent, the grounds taken in the appeal appear to be afterthought and dismissed the appeal vide order dated August 5, 2020.
Hence, this Writ Petition has been filed.
The Honorable Allahabad High Court set aside the order for confiscation of goods and order in FORM MOV-09 passed and held that service of notice on truck driver or fixation of copy of order on truck is none of the methods prescribed under GST Law and it is well settled that whenever a manner is prescribed, it should be done in that manner alone. Further, observed that at no point of time, the Ranchi Carrying Corporation (the Petitioner) was granted an opportunity of submitting reply and the grounds taken by the Petitioner before the Appellate Authority (Respondent) were not considered, recording them to be an afterthought. Thus, on a plain reading, a failure of natural justice has been occasioned to the Petitioner.