MAHENDRA KUMAR INDERMAL Vs. DY. ASSTT. COMMR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order of Prohibition issued in Form GST INS-03, dated 21-12-2019 by the 1st respondent-Deputy Assistant Commissioner (ST), Jaggaiahpet unit, Nandigama Circle, Bhavanipuram, Vijayawada, this writ petition has been preferred.

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has advanced solitary contention emphasizing the jurisdiction of the 1st respondent, who passed the order of Prohibition as contemplated under Section 67(2) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter be called as "CGST"). It is urged that the authority competent to pass the order should not be below the rank of Joint Commissioner while the order impugned has been passed by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, who is not competent to pass the order of Prohibition, therefore, the order of prohibition so passed confiscating the goods is unsustainable in law.

(3.) On the other hand, Learned Government Pleader for Commercial Tax appearing on behalf of the respondents though opposed the prayer, but on reference to the provision so contemplated under Section 67(2) of the Act, he consented to adjudication of the case on merits.