Court Orders Release of Seized Goods on Security Deposit in E-Way Bill Dispute

Case Name:

LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. And 3 Others

Writ Tax No. 454 of 2018

Key Takeaways:

- Goods seized for lack of E-Way Bill can be released on furnishing security and indemnity bond.

- The court allowed time for counter-affidavit and rejoinder.

- The validity of Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 is under scrutiny.

- The court's interim order protects the assessee's interests while the case is pending.

Issue:

Does Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, as it stood originally before the 4th amendment, stand revived with the rescinding of the notifications dated 30/31.01.2018 enforcing the amended Rule 138 with regard to the E-Way Bill?

Facts:

- The goods of LG Electronics India Pvt. Ltd. were seized on 16.03.2018 for want of an E-Way Bill.

- The company challenged the seizure, claiming that the original Rule 138 should apply due to the rescinding of certain notifications.

- The case was brought before the Allahabad High Court.

Arguments:

- The petitioner (LG Electronics) argued that Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, as it stood originally before the 4th amendment, should be revived due to the rescinding of notifications dated 30/31.01.2018 that enforced the amended Rule 138 regarding E-Way Bills.

- The respondents' arguments are not explicitly stated in the provided information.

Key Legal Precedents:

The judgment does not mention any specific legal precedents. The case appears to focus on the interpretation of Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017, and the effect of rescinding certain notifications.

Judgement:

- The court allowed two weeks for the petitioner to file a rejoinder affidavit.

- The seized goods and vehicle are to be released forthwith upon the petitioner furnishing: a) Security other than cash and bank guarantee of the proposed tax and penalty b) Indemnity bond of the value of the seized goods

The petitioner was permitted to furnish a reply to the show cause notice by 24.03.2018 if a final order had not been passed.

- Any order passed pursuant to the show cause notice will be subject to the decision of this writ petition.

- The petitioner is at liberty to challenge any such order in the appropriate forum.

FAQs:

Q1: What was the main issue in this case?

A1: The main issue was whether the original Rule 138 of the UP GST Rules should apply after certain notifications were rescinded.

Q2: What did the court order regarding the seized goods?

A2: The court ordered the release of the seized goods and vehicle upon furnishing security and an indemnity bond.

Q3: Is this the final judgment in the case?

A3: No, this appears to be an interim order. The court allowed time for further affidavits and set the case for future hearing.

Q4: What's an E-Way Bill?

A4: An E-Way Bill is a document required for the movement of goods in India under the GST regime. In this case, the goods were seized for lack of this document.

Q5: Can the petitioner still respond to the show cause notice?

A5: Yes, the court allowed the petitioner to furnish a reply to the show cause notice by 24.03.2018 if a final order had not been passed.

The goods of the petitioner have been seized on 16.03.2018 for want of E-Way Bill.

On the respective submissions of the parties the issue which crops up in this petition is whether Rule 138 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) as it stood originally before the 4th amendment would stand revived with the rescinding of the notifications dated 30/31.01.2018 enforcing the amended Rule 138 of the Rules w.e.f. 01.02.2018 with regard to the E-Way Bill.

Sri C.B. Tripathi, Special Counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 may file counter affidavit within a month. Two weeks thereafter are allowed to the petitioner for filing rejoinder affidavit. List for admission/final disposal on the expiry of above period.

In the mean time, the seized goods of the petitioner as well as the vehicle be released by the authorities forthwith on the petitioner furnishing security other than cash and bank guarantee of the proposed tax and penalty and indemnity bond of the value of the seized goods.

It is further provided that any order which is passed pursuant to the show cause notice will be subject to decision of this writ petition and at the same time the petitioner would also at liberty to challenge it in the

appropriate forum.

The petitioner is permitted to furnish the reply to the show

cause notice by 24.03.2018 if final order has not been

passed so far.

Order Date :- 22.3.2018

piyush