No Need To Furnish Bank Guarantee in Case of Seizure on account of Wrong Eway-Bill Declaration
Pragati Enterprises vs. State of U.P. (Allahabad)
In the above cited case, it has been held by Hon’ble Allahabad HC that the goods and vehicle of the petitioner may be released forthwith subject to deposit of security other than cash or bank guarantee, equal to the amount of tax payable on goods, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority. It is welcome judgement as in genuine cases furnishing of Bank Guarantee involves severe working capital challenges for dealers.
We have heard Shri M.M. Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri C.B. Tripathi, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent.
Learned Standing Counsel has received instruction that no penalty order has been passed against the petitioner. The petitioner has ought to quash the seizure order dated 05.01.2018 which has been passed against the petitioner on the allegation that there was some wrong declaration on the date in the E-way Bill. The petitioner states that it had been written down inadvertently. Other than that no other allegation has been made against the petitioner.
In these circumstances, the goods and vehicle of the petitioner may be released forthwith subject to deposit of security other than cash or bank guarantee, equal to the amount of tax payable on goods, to the satisfaction of the Assessing Authority.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
