Payment of tax and penalty for release of detained goods—he 1st respondent's insistences that the petitioner should pay the amount either in cash or through demand drafts.
Held that—the 1st respondent's insistence that the petitioner should pay the amount either in cash or through demand draft cannot be sustained. As is further evident from Ext.P7, the petitioner is a dealer registered under the CGST. Cumulatively viewed, the petitioner's paying the penalty under Ext.P5 receipt to the portal of GST is eminently sustainable.
Therefore court directs the 1st respondent authority to release the goods, after receiving Ext.P5 receipt. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of.  [FASHION MARBLE AND GRANITE COMPANY PVT. LTD] [KERALA HIGH COURT[2018] 2 TAXLOK.COM 174 (Kerala)