CHAITHANYA GRANITES AND MARBLES Versus TTHE ASST STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO 5, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KASARAGOD, THE STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO. V, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, KASARAGOD, THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AND UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI – 2018 (11) TMI 331 – KERALA HIGH COURT – [2019] 61 G S.T.R. 38 (Ker) – Detention of goods with vehicle – delay in transporting the consignment after filing E-way bill due to flood – Held that:- The petitioner has every document to transport the goods safely, save the expiry of the time prescribed in the e-way bill. It is preposterous to contend that the petitioner delayed the transport deliberately-for no purpose. Granted, I cannot find fault with the authorities in detaining the goods. But once the petitioner has explained the circumstances through Exts.P8 and P8(a), they ought to have taken a leni
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
aught in an unprecedented flood. To reach Edapally, Ernakulam, the transporter had no motorable road because most roads, by then, were inundated-even breached. The transport thus took more than usual time to reach Edapally. By then, the e-way bill had expired. 3. In that background, the respondent authorities intercepted the vehicle at Kasaragod and detained the goods under Section 129 of the GST Act. Faced with the Ext.P7 order of detention, the petitioner submitted the Exts.P8 and P8(a) replies. Later, after failing in its effort to have the interim custody of the goods, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. 4. In response to the submissions made by the petitioner's counsel, the Government Pleader has submitted that the petitioner had ample time to have the consignment transported to Edappally, on time. According to her, the vehicle was ready by 13.08.2018. And from Surathkal in Karnataka, it would not have taken the transporters so many days to reach Kerala-that is, beyon
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
y 16.08.2018 the flood situation in Kerala worsened. Perhaps, the transporter must have played safe and waited for the roads to clear. And that did not immediately happen. 8. I reckon that the petitioner has every document to transport the goods safely, save the expiry of the time prescribed in the e-way bill. It is preposterous to contend that the petitioner delayed the transport deliberately-for no purpose. Granted, I cannot find fault with the authorities in detaining the goods. But once the petitioner has explained the circumstances through Exts.P8 and P8(a), they ought to have taken a lenient view-rather a practical view, at that. Under these circumstances, I dispose of the writ petition, holding that the respondents will release the goods after securing personal bond from the petitioner-that is, without insisting on the bank guarantee. This arrangement, I clarify, will not affect the adjudication under Section 129 of the Act. – Case laws – Decisions – Judgements – Orders – Tax
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =