HC Dismissed Writ Filed by Adjudicating Authority Against Modification of Confiscation Order by Appellate Authority | HC

Case Details: Joint Commissioner of State Tax (I & E) v. Sasi Pathirakunnath - [2024] 161 taxmann.com 744 (Kerala)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.
• Mohammed Rafiq, Spl. G.P. (Taxes) for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The State Tax Officer received intimation from the Railway Protection Force, Ernakulam regarding the transport of gold by a person without any documents. The carrier failed to produce documents to prove the genuineness of the gold ornaments under the transportation. The State Tax Officer issued notices proposing to confiscate the gold ornaments transported without any document and imposed penalty as provided under Section 130 of the GST Act.

The Adjudicating Authority passed order of confiscation and the carrier filed appeal. The Appellate Authority reduced the amount of fine in lieu of confiscation for release of gold on premise that the carrier was a registered person who maintains proper books of accounts and files regular returns. The department filed writ petition to challenge the order of Appellate Authority.

High Court Held

The Honorable High Court noted that the Appellate Authority has ample power to decide issue afresh and make enquiry to decide issue in appeal. Moreover, Section 107(11) has wider amplitude than normal appellate provisions against an order of Court/ Tribunal. Therefore, it was held that the Appellate Authority had jurisdiction to interfere with discretion exercised by adjudicating authority in imposing fine in lieu of confiscation of goods other than market value of goods. The Court also noted that the impugned order passed by Appellate Authority did not suffer from any unreasonableness or based on irrelevant consideration. Thus, the writ petition was dismissed.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Anandeshwar Traders v. State of Uttar Pradesh [(2021) 92 GSTR 197] [Para 40] followed.

List of Cases Referred to

• Kantaru Rajeevaru v. Indian Young Lawyers Association 9 SCC 121 (para 17),
• Deputy Commissioner, Dakshina Kannada District v. Rudolp Fernandes 3 SCC 306 (para 17),
• India v. Kuldeep Sing 2 SCC 590 (para 17)
• Customs v. Mansi Impex 270 ELT 631 (para 17).