Tvl. RK Motors Versus State Tax Officer
GST
2019 (2) TMI 125 – MADRAS HIGH COURT – 2019 (23) G. S. T. L. 178 (Mad.)
MADRAS HIGH COURT – HC
Dated:- 24-1-2019
W. P. (MD)No. 1287 of 2019 And W. M. P. (MD)No. 1098 of 2019
GST
Mr. Justice G.R. Swaminathan
For the Petitioner : Mr.A.Chandrasekaran
For the Respondent : Mr.Aayiram K.Selvakumar Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.
2. Mr.A.Valivittan, DCTO (Sattur Road) Roving Squad, O/o.The Assistant Commissioner (ST) (Enforcement), Virudhunagar is present and assisted this Court today.
3. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the stage of admission itself.
4. The writ petitioner is an authorised dealer for Bajaj Auto Limited. They are dealing in two wheelers. They have registered themselves as an assessee under the Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
6,000/- had been levied as a penalty. The vehicle has also been seized and detained. Unless the writ petitioner remitted the said penalty amount, it has been made clear that the goods as well as the vehicle would not be released. It has been further made clear that the goods would be liable for confiscation and further proceedings under Section 130 of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 would be taken. Hence, this writ petition has been filed questioning the detention order dated 28.12.2018 and the order dated 11.01.2019 passed under Section 129(3) of the Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
5. The respondent official would submit that the vehicle ought to have halted at Virudhunagar and the goods carried in the vehicle should have been offloaded in the branch office of the writ petitioner at Virudhunagar. But, the vehicle did not stop at Virudhunagar, instead, it moved towards Sivakasi. Only when the vehicle had travelled a distance of 7 km away from Virudhunagar,
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
The driver, who drove the vehicle in question is not a Tamilian. His name is Badrinath Bhandari. He hails from Maharashtra.
8. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner states that the said driver knows neither English nor Tamil. He knows only Marathi and Hindi.
9. The specific stand taken by the writ petitioner is that the driver without knowing the correct route had taken a wrong turn and headed towards Sivakasi.
10. It is also not in dispute that the bill is addressed only to the writ petitioner's principal office at Sivakasi; delivery alone is to be made at Virudhunagar. I am of the view that even if by mistake, a wrong instruction had been given to the driver of the vehicle to head towards Sivakasi. Still it would not really matter. The only question that the respondent ought to have posed is whether there is any attempt at evasion. It is not as if the goods had already been offloaded. The vehicle was intercepted when it was in transit. The respondent ought to h
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =
he said circular contemplates levy of only a minor fine of Rs. 500/-.
12. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, the goods in question are two wheelers. They cannot be sold without proper registration with the Motor Vehicle Authorities. That would require proper documentation. Therefore, in a case of this nature, the writ petitioner could not have evaded his statutory obligations in any manner. This aspect of the matter ought to have been taken note by the respondent.
13. The learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner submits that the writ petitioner would pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- as fine to the respondent.
14. The above submission of the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner is recorded. By directing the writ petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 5,000/- [Rupees Five Thousand only] towards fine to the respondent, the orders impugned in this writ petition stands quashed. The respondent shall forthwith release the vehicle as well
= = = = = = = =
Plain text (Extract) only
For full text:-Visit the Source
= = = = = = = =