GST LogoGST Press

Sai Krishna Contract Works Vs Deputy Assistant Commissioner

Date: December 30, 2025

Court: High Court
Bench: Andhra Pradesh
Type: Writ Petition
Judge(s)/Member(s): R RAGHUNANDAN RAO, T.C.D.SEKHAR
Download

Subject Matter

Delayed Penalty Payment Under Section 129 Allows Goods and Conveyance Release if Confiscation Not Pursued

Search, Seizure and DetentionConfiscation

Summary

The Writ Petition is allowed, directing the release of the detained goods and conveyance. This decision rests on the fact that despite a delayed payment of penalty under Section 129 of the GST Act, the authorities failed to initiate further confiscation proceedings within the stipulated time.

Summary of Facts and Dispute:
  1. Impugned Action: The 1st respondent stopped a vehicle on 07.09.2025 and initiated proceedings under Section 129 of the GST Act, culminating in an order dated 19.09.2025, which levied a penalty of Rs.56,193/- under CGST and Rs.56,193/- under SGST.
  2. Petitioner's Argument: The petitioners paid the total penalty amount of Rs.1,12,386/- on 15.11.2025, albeit beyond the stipulated 15-day period under Section 129(6). They sought the release of the conveyance and goods, arguing that since no further action for confiscation was taken by the authorities after the period lapsed, the goods and conveyance should be released.
  3. Core Question of Law: Whether goods and conveyance, detained under Section 129 of the GST Act, should be released upon payment of penalty, even if such payment is delayed, in the absence of any subsequent confiscation proceedings by the authorities.
Key Legal Issues & Findings:
Application of Section 129 of the GST Act regarding detention, penalty, and release

The Court considered the scheme of Section 129 of the GST Act concerning the detention, penalty, and release of goods and conveyances.

  • Authority to Detain and Seize: Section 129 empowers authorities to detain and seize goods and conveyances if their movement is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules.
  • Penalty Levy and Release: This provision allows the authority to levy a penalty and mandates the release of the conveyance and goods upon payment of the assessed penalty.
  • Consequence of Delayed Payment and Inaction: Although the penalty was paid beyond the 15-day period stipulated under the Act, the authorities did not initiate any further action for confiscation of the goods after the period under Section 129(6) had lapsed. Therefore, the Court found it appropriate to direct the release.
Ruling:
  1. Outcome: The Writ Petition is allowed.
  2. Directions: The 1st respondent is directed to release the conveyance and goods.
  3. Liberty: No specific liberty granted to Revenue.

FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT

The 1st petitioner is the owner of certain goods in the nature of iron & metal scrap. The 2nd petitioner is the owner of the conveyance in which these goods were being moved. According to the petitioners, the goods were sought to be transported from Nellore to Chittoor and the 1st respondent had stopped the vehicle on 07.09.2025 and had initiated a process under Section 129 of the Goods & Services Act, 2017 [for short “the GST Act”].

2. The aforesaid proceedings are said to have culminated in an order, dated 19.09.2025, wherein the 1st respondent had levied a penalty of Rs.56,193/-, under the CGST and a penalty of Rs.56,193/- under the SGST. The said proceedings also called upon the petitioners to pay the penalty within the stipulated period as per Section 129(6) of the GST Act. The petitioners, in compliance with these directions, had paid the aforesaid penalty on 15.11.2025. Thereafter, the petitioners sought the release of the conveyance as well as the goods. As neither the conveyance nor the goods were being released. The 1st petitioner had initially approached this by way of the present Writ Petition. Subsequently, the 2nd petitioner has impleaded himself as the 2nd

3. Section 129 of the GST Act empowers the authorities under the GST, to detain and seize any goods and conveyances, in transit, if such movement of goods is not in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules. This provision empowers the authority to levy a penalty and also to release the conveyance and goods on payment of the penalty assessed by the detaining authority.

4. The 1st petitioner is said to have paid this penal amount on 15.11.2025. Though the payment is beyond the period of 15 days stipulated under the GST Act, it would be appropriate to direct the 1st respondent to release the conveyance and goods inasmuch as the 1st respondent did not take any further action for confiscation of the goods after the period under Section 129(6) of the GST Act had lapsed.

5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, interlocutory applications pending, if any shall stand closed.

    GST Press