2018 (10) TMI 1190 – KERALA HIGH COURT – 2019 (20) G. S. T. L. 326 (Ker.) – Detention of vehicle with goods – e-way bill had expired – Section 129 of the SGST Act – After generating that bill, it had the goods loaded into a transport vehicle. But it could not transport them during night hours. The next day, 2nd October, was a holiday. So it could transport the goods only on 3.10.2018 at 10.40 am. – Held that:- The writ petition disposed off settting aside the Ext. P10 – the petitioner can approach the ASTO tomorrow – On the petitioners' approach, the authority will reexamine the issue, keeping in view the petitioner's Ext.P9 explanation and the other materials, and pass orders on the same day – petition disposed off. – WP (C). No. 32692 of 2018 Dated:- 11-10-2018 – MR DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J. For The Petitioner : SRI. K. N. SREEKUMARAN, SRI.N. SANTHOSHKUMAR AND SRI.P.J.ANILKUMAR (A-1768) For The Respondent : GP. DR. THUSHARA JAMES JUDGMENT The Petitioner, a dealer under the new GST re
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
the interim custody of the goods, the petitioner must comply with Rule 140 of the CGST Rules: bank guarantee and simple bond for the tax, penalty, and interest, too. So assailing the detention, the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 4. After taking me through the record, the petitioner's counsel submits that the delay is minimal and that was under unavoidable circumstances. But the respondent's attitude is hypertechnical. He further draws my attention to Ext.P9 explanation, dt.4.10.2018, the petitioner submitted to the Assistant Sales Tax Officer. According to him, the petitioner issued the e-way bill as per the request from its customs broker, who must have cleared the consignment from the port and delivered it to the petitioner's factory as originally planned-on time. But the customs broker could remove the vehicle from the port only on 03.10.2018. The delay was because, first, the e-way bill was generated on 1st October late in the eveint ; then the next day was a
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
strenuously opposed any judicial intervention because once the statutory conditions stand diluted, she continues, it would provide a weapon for the tax evaders. She has also stressed that the respondent authorities following the procedure to a perfection cannot be castigated as hyper-technical. 8. That said, the Government Pleader submits that, as seen from the Ext.P9, the petitioner may have faced a genuine difficulty. If this Court intervenes at this stage, it may become a precedent, throwing the departmental actions out of gear. Instead, she suggests an alternative: this Court may set aside the Ext.P2 and remand the matter to the Assistant State Tax Officer, who will consider the issue afresh, especially, keeping in view the petitioner's Ext.P9 explanation. She further assures the Court that the ASTO will pass orders within 24 hours, once the petitioner approaches him. 9. For this proposal, the petitioner's counsel agrees. 10. So without adverting to the merits, I dispose o
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =