In this petition, the petitioner has prayed to set aside the impugned refund rejection order. The matter is remanded back to the appellate authority/respondent to decide the appeal on merits in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

The clarification given by the Board vide its Circular dated 31, 2018, levy of penalty under Section 129(1)(b) was not called for and could not be justified as Section 129(1)(a) of the Act provides that where owner of the goods comes forward for payment of penalty, the amount has to be two hundred per cent of the tax payable, whereas, in the case in hand, the penalty has been levied to the tune of hundred per cent of the value of the goods

The High Court has materially erred in entertaining the writ petition against the show cause notice and quashing and setting aside the same. It was premature for the High Court to opine anything on whether there was any evasion of the tax or not. The same was to be considered in an appropriate proceeding for which the notice under Section 130 of the Act was issued.

The petitioner is aggrieved as the respondents have frozen the escrow account as well as its current account. The present petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to apply afresh in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the order that may be passed in respect of its objections.

This court is not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy by way of appeal. Further, refusal to entertain this writ petition will not be a bar on the respondent authority concerned to release the vehicle in question, if the petitioner makes any application and complies the formalities in accordance with law.

In the instant case, the petitioner’s request for a refund is rejected on the ground of limitation. The petition is allowed quashing the impugned orders issued by the third respondent and the petitioner’s refund applications are restored for reconsideration.

This Court is of the considered view that the petitioner must be granted liberty to file such affidavit before the fifth respondent and call upon the fifth respondent to pass suitable orders in accordance with law within the timeframe.

"Advisory related to changes in GSTR-5A"

Advisory for Pilot Project of Biometric-Based Aadhaar Authentication and Document Verification for GST Registration Applicants of Gujarat and Puducherry

Advisory for Online Compliance Pertaining to ITC mismatch -GST DRC-01C

ITC Reversal on Account of Rule 37(A)

The show cause notice and order of cancellation of registration are quashed and set aside. The certificate of registration is restored forthwith.