1 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 344 of 2018 Petitioner :- M/S Skipper Limited Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Ors Counsel for Petitioner :- Aloke Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I., Anant Kumar Tiwari, C.S.C. Hon'ble Biswanath Somadder,J. Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J. 1. order dated 4th December, 2019 issued by Assistant Commissioner (Incharge) Commercial Tax, Mobile Squad Mughalsarai Unit, Chandauli is taken in record. 2. By order dated 4th December, 2019, petitioner was required to furnish bank guarantee equivalent to amount of his liability determined under Section 129 of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 at time of seizure of goods and conveyance in transit. 3. It is subsequent development, which this Court has taken into cognizance for just adjudication of controversy. order dated 4th December, 2019 has been passed in purported compliance of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in State of Uttar Pradesh and others Vs. M/s Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd reported in [2019] 71 NTNDX 409 (SC). operative portion of said judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court is set forth hereunder: In our opinion, therefore, orders passed by High Court which are contrary to stated provisions shall not be given effect to by authorities. Instead, authorities shall process claims of concerned assessee afresh as per express stipulations in section 67 of Act read with relevant rules in that regard. In terms of this order, competent authority shall call upon every assessee to complete formality strictly as per requirements of stated 2 provisions disregarding order passed by High Court in his case, if same deviates from statutory compliances. That be done within four weeks without any exception. 4. order dated 4th December, 2019 while being passed in compliance of orders of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in M/s Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd. (supra) is under section 129 of Uttar Pradesh Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'UPGST Act'). Section 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 is extracted below for ease of reference: [129]. Detention, seizure and release of goods and conveyances in transit.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, where any person transports any goods or stores any goods while they are in transit in contravention of provisions of this Act or rules made thereunder, all such goods and conveyance used as means of transport for carrying said goods and documents relating to such goods and conveyance shall be liable to detention or seizure and after detention or seizure, shall be released, (a) on payment of applicable tax and penalty equal to one hundred per cent of tax payable on such goods and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of amount equal to two per cent. of value of goods or twenty-five thousand rupees, whichever is less, where owner of goods comes forward for payment of such tax and penalty; (b) on payment of applicable tax and penalty equal to fifty per cent. of value of goods reduced by tax amount paid thereon and, in case of exempted goods, on payment of amount equal to five per cent. of value of goods or twenty five thousand rupees, whichever is less, where owner of goods does not come forward for payment of such tax and penalty; (c) upon furnishing security equivalent to amount payable under Clause (a) or Clause (b) in such form and manner as may be prescribed: Provided that no such goods or conveyance shall be detained or seized without serving order of detention or seizure on person transporting goods. (2) provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 67 shall, mutatis mutandis, apply for detention and seizure of goods and conveyances. (3) proper officer detaining or seizing goods or conveyances shall issue notice specifying tax and penalty payable and thereafter, pass order for payment of tax and penalty under Clause (a) or Clause (b) or Clause (c). (4) No tax, interest or penalty shall be determined under sub-section (3) without giving person concerned opportunity of being heard. 3 (5) On payment of amount referred in sub-section (1), all proceedings in respect of notice specified in sub-section (3) shall be deemed to be concluded. (6) Where person transporting any goods or owner of goods fails to pay amount of tax and penalty as provided in sub-section (1) within {fourteen days} of such detention or seizure, further proceedings shall be initiated in accordance with provisions of section 130: Provided that where detained or seized goods are perishable or hazardous in nature or are likely to depreciate in value with passage of time, said period of Z{fourteen days} may be reduced by proper officer. 5. perusal of provision shows that upon seizure of goods and conveyances in transit, Revenue shall issue notice specifying tax and penalty liable to be paid by assessee and pass order for payment and tax and penalty in manner provided under Clause (a) or Clause (b) or Clause (c) of Section 129(1) of UPGST Act, 2017. provision envisages payment of applicable tax and penalty or furnishing security equivalent to amount payable. goods and conveyances are liable to be released immediately upon payment of such amount or furnishing security of equivalent amount. Further, upon payment of amount or furnishing of security referred to Section 129(1) of UPGST Act, 2017, proceedings initiated by notice under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act, 2017 shall be deemed to be concluded in view of Section 129(5) of UPGST Act, 2017. 6. scheme of Section 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 is most reliable guide of legislative intent. Section 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 contemplates comprehensive scheme with summary procedure for release of goods and conveyances seized in transit. 4 legislative intent is to secure revenue interests and equally to ensure expeditious release of seized goods and conveyances. This procedure is distinct from adjudicatory process of determination of tax liability. scheme of Section 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 thus achieves purpose of keeping trade and commercial transactions unhindered by adjudicatory process for determination of tax liability, while at same time protecting revenue interests and allowing adjudicatory mechanism to run its course independently. 7. To prevent haemorrhaging of trade and commerce by prolonged of detention seized goods caused by inordinately long periods of litigation, proceedings triggered by issuance of notice under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act, 2017 stand concluded under Section 129(5) of UPGST Act, 2017 after noticee has deposited amount or furnished security required of him. This allows seized goods to be released expeditiously and proceedings in regard thereof to arrive at litigative terminus in short time frame. 8. facts of case will now be construed in light of above said provisions of Act. facts themselves lie in narrow compass. 9. It is admitted by State Revenue that petitioner had furnished security in form of bank guarantee, equivalent to amount payable under clause (a) of section 129(1) of UPGST Act, 2017, upon demand made by Revenue to furnish such security of like 5 amount. security in form of bank guarantee so furnished upon demand to satisfaction of State Revenue Authorities is clearly relatable to Section 129 (1)(c) of UPGST Act, 2017. 10. order dated 4th December, 2019 issued by Assistant Commissioner (Incharge) Commercial Tax, Mobile Squad Mughalsarai Unit, Chandauli directs petitioner to furnish bank guarantee of amount mentioned in order, in compliance of order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court. operative portion of said order passed by authorities reads as under: " 0 11.12.2019 0 130 " 11. It is beyond dispute that petitioner had furnished security in form of bank guarantee of amount and in manner required of him by State Revenue Authorities, under Section 129(1)(a) read with Section 129(1)(c) of UPGST Act, 2017, even prior to order dated 04.12.2019. security in shape of bank guarantee remains deposited with State Revenue. seized vehicle and goods have been released on strength of such security deposit. Hence, proceedings taken out under section 129 of UPGST Act, 2017 are liable to be concluded in view of section 129 (5) of UPGST Act, 2017. 6 12. Clearly notice under Section 129(3) of UPGST Act, 2017, dated 4th December, 2019 is infructuous and proceedings taken thereunder are liable to be treated as concluded. 13. In light preceding discussion, writ petition is being disposed of with following directions: 14. Revenue Authorities are directed to adjudicate case on merits, expeditiously, preferably, within period of three months from date of receipt of certified copy of this order. 15. bank guarantee furnished by petitioner assessee to State Revenue Authorities shall remain with State Revenue Authorities and its invocation shall be subject to result of adjudication. 16. writ petition is finally disposed of accordingly. Order Date :- 07.02.2020 Ashish Tripathi (Biswanath Somadder,J.) (Ajay Bhanot,J.) Skipper Limited v. Union Of India And 3 Or