1 By way of this writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the writ applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:
“A. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the learned respondents to forthwith release truck number GJ-03-AX-5727.
B. This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order quashing and setting aside the impugned notice qua confiscation of conveyance (annexed at Annexure A).
C. Pending notice, admission and final hearing of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to direct the learned respondents to forthwith release truck number GJ-03-AX-5727.
D. Ex parte ad interim relief in terms of prayer C may kindly be granted.
E. Such further relief(s) as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be granted in the interest of justice for which act of kindness your petitioner shall forever pray.”
2 We take notice of the order dated 25th September 2019 passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court. The order reads thus:
“1. Mr. Uchit Sheth, learned advocate for the petitioner has invited the attention of the court to the provisions of section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and more particularly to the third proviso to sub-section (2) thereof, to submit that when any conveyance is used for the carriage of the goods or passengers for hire, the owner of the conveyance shall be given an option to pay in lieu of confiscation of the conveyance a fine equal to the tax payable on the goods being transported thereon. It was submitted that, therefore, even if an order of confiscation is passed under section 130 of the CGST Act, at best, the petitioner would be required to pay a fine equal to the tax payable on the goods being transported.
2. Mr. Trupesh Kathiriya, learned Assistant Government Pleader has disputed the aforesaid position by inviting the attention of the court to the second proviso to sub-section (2) of section 130 as well as sub-section (3) of section 130 of the Act.
3. Having regard to the submissions advanced by the learned advocates for the respective parties, Issue Notice returnable on 10th October, 2019.
4. By way of ad-interim relief, the second respondent is directed to release the vehicle of the petitioner being truck No.GJ-03-AX-5727 upon the petitioner paying a fine of ₹ 62,024/- (Rupees sixty two thousand twenty four only) as proposed in the notice dated 12.7.2019 issued under section 130 of the Act in lieu of confiscation of conveyance.
5. The above arrangement shall be subject to the final outcome of the petition as well as the final outcome of the proceedings under section 130 of the CGST Act. Till then, such amount shall be treated as a deposit made by the petitioner subject to the final outcome of the proceedings under section 130 of the CGST Act without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the same before the higher authority in case an adverse order is passed against him. The petitioner shall also file an undertaking before this court to the effect that in case an adverse order is passed against him under section 130 of the CGST Act, he shall pay the differential amount subject to his right to challenge such order.
Direct service is permitted.”
3 We have heard Mr. Uchit Sheth, the learned counsel appearing for the writ applicant and Mr. Trupesh Kathiriya, the learned A.G.P. appearing for the respondents.
4 We are informed that the final order of confiscation under Section 130 of the CGST Act, 2017 has been passed. In such circumstances, we relegate the writ applicant to challenge such order of confiscation by preferring an appeal before the appellate authority under Section 107 of the Act.
5 As the truck has already been released by way of the interim order referred to above, nothing further requires to be adjudicated in the present matter.
6 This writ application is disposed of with liberty to the writ applicant to prefer an appeal in accordance with law. We clarify that we have otherwise not expressed any opinion on the merits of this case.