Writ petitions could not be filed before HC against seizure orders: SC
[State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kay Pan Fragrance (P.) Ltd. [2019] 112 taxmann.com 81 (SC)]
The appeal was filed against the interim orders passed by the High Court directing the State to release the seized goods on deposit of security or on furnishing of indemnity bond equal to tax and penalty to
the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority.
The Apex Court found that the High Court in all such cases should have referred the assessees to the Appropriate Authority for complying with the procedure prescribed under the GST Act. The CGST Act read with CGST Rules contains a complete code for release (including provisional release) of seized goods. Therefore, the orders passed by the High Court are held contrary to the provisions prescribed and such order would not be given effect and to be processed by the authorities afresh in accordance with law.
[State of Uttar Pradesh v. Kay Pan Fragrance (P.) Ltd. [2019] 112 taxmann.com 81 (SC)]
The appeal was filed against the interim orders passed by the High Court directing the State to release the seized goods on deposit of security or on furnishing of indemnity bond equal to tax and penalty to
the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority.
The Apex Court found that the High Court in all such cases should have referred the assessees to the Appropriate Authority for complying with the procedure prescribed under the GST Act. The CGST Act read with CGST Rules contains a complete code for release (including provisional release) of seized goods. Therefore, the orders passed by the High Court are held contrary to the provisions prescribed and such order would not be given effect and to be processed by the authorities afresh in accordance with law.
No comments:
Post a Comment