^®
TaxReply India Private Limited

GST Library

Best GST Library

Subscription Plans

TaxGPT

GST News | Updates

GST Calendar

GST Case Laws

GST Case Laws Sitemap

GST Notifications, Circulars, Releases etc.

Act & Rules

Act & Rules (Multi-view)

GST Rates

HSN Codes ^New

GST Forms

GST Diary

GST Notebook

GST Fees Manager

GST Council Meetings

GST Set-off Calculator

ITC Reversal Calculator

E-invoice Calculator

Inverted Duty Calculator

GSTR-3B Manual

GSTR-9 Manual

GSTR-9C Manual

Full Site Search

E-way Bill

Finance Bill

GST e-books

TaxReply Support

YouTube Videos

Twitter

Buy Premium Tax Domains

About Us

Our Services

🔒

TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

🔒

^®

Subscribe Free GST updates on...

Subscribe to Best GST Library of India and get ahead of the rest. Click here for plans. | GST Act & Rules e-book Click here. |

VISHAL CHOBIA vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
(Allahabad High Court)

Hon'ble Judges:

ARUN BHANSALI
VIKAS BUDHWAR

Pet. Counsel

Vedika Nath

Yashonidhi Shukla

Pranit Bag

Res. Counsel

Meenakshi Singh

Petitioner / Applicant	VISHAL CHOBIA
Respondent	STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
Court	Allahabad High Court
State	Uttar Pradesh
Date	Dec 5, 2024
Order No.	Writ Tax No. - 2171 of 2024, 2172 of 2024
Citation	2024(12) TAXREPLY 11812
Add to Favorites	Add to favorites.
Download Original Order
Print (Full Page)
Print (Judgement Only)

TaxGPT ^Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in

Listen this case in simple words

Audio Timeline

Audio Speed:

AA |

ORDER
ORDER 1. These writ petitions are directed against the orders dated 05.11.2024 passed under Section 129(3) of the Uttar Pradesh Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 (in short ‘the Act’) by which the claim of the ownership of the petitioner on the goods detained by respondent no. 5 has been rejected and the same has been passed in the name of the driver of the vehicle. 2. It is, inter alia, submitted by counsel for the petitioner that penalty has been imposed by the order impugned under Section 129(1)(b) of the Act, whereas in terms of the Clarification dated 31.12.2018 issued by the Central Board for Taxes and Customs, GST Policy Wing, a penalty in the present case could have been levied under Section 129(1)(a) of the Act, to which the petitioner is not disputing. Further submissions have been made that the authority, while passing the order, despite specific assertion in the claim that the goods in question were owned by the petitioner, found the same as incorrect on....