Heard Sri Shubham Agrawal, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri C.B. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The petitioners in the writ petition are seeking quashing of the order dated 29.11.2018 whereby the vehicle of the petitioner no.2 has been detained as well as order dated 07.12.2018 whereby a demand of ₹ 2,30,000/- has been made against the petitioner in exercise of power under Section 129(1)(b) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act (In short “U.P. GST Act”).
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner has already deposited the required tax of ₹ 64,400/- with penalty of a like amount which is evident from the payment receipt filed at page 36 of the writ petition and therefore he is not required to pay further penalty of ₹ 2,30,000/- as owner of the vehicle and Section 129(1)(b) of the ‘U.P. GST Act’ does not come into play in the matter.
The matter requires consideration.
The respondents may file their counter affidavit within a month.
Till the next date of listing, it is directed that the operation of the impugned order dated 07.12.2018 shall remain stayed and the respondents shall also release the seized vehicles alongwith goods in favour of the petitioners.