Having heard the learned advocates for the parties and upon perusing the instant writ petition, it appears that the writ petitioner has approached this Court essentially seeking release of his vehicle which has been detained by the Assistant Commissioner (Mobile Squad)-3, Kanpur, on 8th November, 2019.

The pleadings in the writ petition reveals that a penalty has been imposed for the purpose of release of the goods as well as the vehicle in terms of section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

According to the learned advocate for the writ petitioner, his client is merely a registered owner of the vehicle and has nothing to do with the goods which were contained in the vehicle. As such, he is not liable to pay the amount in terms of section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.

For the purpose of deciding the matter, we need to merely look at the heading of the provision contained under Section 129, which reads as follows:

“[129]. Detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit.”

The above heading is wide and clear enough to encompass within its fold this vehicle which has been seized along with the goods and as such, the writ petitioner cannot wriggle out of his liability to pay the amount as imposed in terms of section 129 of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, for the purpose of release of his vehicle. He cannot have the benefit of a segregated liability in the present context and the procedure prescribed for release of vehicle under the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, cannot be avoided by the petitioner.

The writ petition stands dismissed in terms of the observations made hereinabove.

Dismissal of the writ petition, however, shall not stand in the way of the writ petitioner for the purpose of availing any statutory appellate remedy available in accordance with law.