The order of detention passed under Section 129(3) by the 1st respondent is set aside; demanding payment of GST and penalty is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India
Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit – The petitioner sought writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in detaining the goods conveyance and collecting tax and penalty for releasing the said vehicle, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14. During transit of goods, the respondent detained goods and vehicle on the ground that the documents of the vehicle were defective. A show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 31.12.2020. The petitioner contended that the truck was in transit towards its destination carrying valid tax invoice and e-waybill and that there was also no material or evidence to show that the petitioner was unloading the material at some other place. The petitioner submitted that driver explained that for operational convenience, the goods which were destined to Adoni were loaded on top for being delivered first, and that the vehicle was rightly proceeding towards Adoni and after delivering the goods at Adoni, he would then come back to Hyderabad but the respondent did not consider his explanation and detained the vehicle. The court observed that the quantity consigned at Hyderabad was 14.30 tonnes and the quantity which was consigned to Adoni was only 2.01 tonnes. For operational convenience the transporter would load the lesser quantity last and the larger quantity first. The respondent did not understand and simply went by the point that Hyderabad comes first and Adoni comes later ignoring the operational convenience of the transporter. There was not any discrepancy in the total quantity of the load. The respondent had acted mechanically without application of mind to the operational convenience of the transporter.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ Petition and set aside the order of detention. Directed the respondents to refund to the petitioner within four weeks the sum towards GST and penalty paid by the petitioner along with interest at 6% per annum from 04.01.2021 till the date of payment.
The order of detention passed under Section 129(3) by the 1st respondent is set aside; demanding payment of GST and penalty is arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 300A of the Constitution of India
Section 129 of the CGST Act, 2017—Goods in Transit – The petitioner sought writ of Mandamus to declare the action of the respondent in detaining the goods conveyance and collecting tax and penalty for releasing the said vehicle, as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14. During transit of goods, the respondent detained goods and vehicle on the ground that the documents of the vehicle were defective. A show-cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 31.12.2020. The petitioner contended that the truck was in transit towards its destination carrying valid tax invoice and e-waybill and that there was also no material or evidence to show that the petitioner was unloading the material at some other place. The petitioner submitted that driver explained that for operational convenience, the goods which were destined to Adoni were loaded on top for being delivered first, and that the vehicle was rightly proceeding towards Adoni and after delivering the goods at Adoni, he would then come back to Hyderabad but the respondent did not consider his explanation and detained the vehicle. The court observed that the quantity consigned at Hyderabad was 14.30 tonnes and the quantity which was consigned to Adoni was only 2.01 tonnes. For operational convenience the transporter would load the lesser quantity last and the larger quantity first. The respondent did not understand and simply went by the point that Hyderabad comes first and Adoni comes later ignoring the operational convenience of the transporter. There was not any discrepancy in the total quantity of the load. The respondent had acted mechanically without application of mind to the operational convenience of the transporter.
Held that:- The Hon’ble High Court allowed the writ Petition and set aside the order of detention. Directed the respondents to refund to the petitioner within four weeks the sum towards GST and penalty paid by the petitioner along with interest at 6% per annum from 04.01.2021 till the date of payment.