Focuz Constructions Equipments vs. The Asst. State Tax Officer (Intelligence)
Original PDF →IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR THUR AY, THE 20TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 29TH SRAVANA, 1942 WP(C).No.17250 OF 2020(E) PETITIONER/S: FOCUZ CONSTRUCTIONS EQUIPMENTS (A DIVISION OF FOCUZ CORPORATION PVT LTD), 5TH FLOOR, FOCUZ TOWERS, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI,REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, TONY RAPHAEL BY ADV. SMT.S.K.DEVI RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASST. STATE TAX OFFICER (INTELLIGENCE) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE, TAX DEPARTMENT (KERALA), SQUADNO.II, CHENGANNUR-689 121 2 THE ASST. COMMISSIONER (ASSMT) STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAXES (KERALA), SPECIAL CIRCLE I , ERNAKULAM-682 015 3 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS FINANCE SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001 OTHER PRESENT: G.P. DR.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.17250 OF 2020(E) 2 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the detention of a consignment of construction equipments, that was being transported at his instance. On a perusal of Ext.P7 notice it is seen that the objection of the 1st respondent is essentially with regard to the documents that had to accompany the transportation of the goods. It is the specific case of the 1st respondent that the documents did not reflect the transaction covered by the transportation that was apprehended. On a perusal of Ext.P7 notice, I find that the detention by the 1 st respondent cannot be said to be unjustified.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader for the respondent.
Taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I direct the 1st respondent to release the goods and the vehicle to the petitioner on the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for the amount mentioned in Ext.P7 notice. The respondents shall, thereafter, transmit the files to the adjudicating authority for an adjudication of the issue under Section 130 of the GST Act. The Government Pleader shall communicate the gist of this order to the 1st respondent so as to enable the petitioner to clear the goods immediately on furnishing of the bank guarantee. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment together with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further action. The writ petition is disposed as above. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE WP(C).No.17250 OF 2020(E) 3 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1OF THE ORDER NO.SCN 20/20-21 DATED 17.08.2020 EXHIBIT P2OF THE PURCHASE ORDER DATED 10.07.20 EXHIBIT P3THE GST MOV-1 DATED 14.8.2020 EXHIBIT P4OF THE GST MOV-2 DATED 14.8.2020 EXHIBIT P5OF THE GST MOV-4 DATED 14.8.2020 EXHIBIT P6OF THE GST MOV-6 DATED 14.8.2020 EXHIBIT P7OF THE GST MOV-7 DATED 14.8.2020 EXHIBIT P8OF THE INVOICE DATED 31.07.2020 EXHIBIT P9OF THE INVOICE DATED 3.08.2020 EXHIBIT P9AOF THE INVOICE DATED 10.08.2020 EXHIBIT P9BOF THE INVOICE DATED 14.08.2020 EXHIBIT P10OF THE INVOICE DATED 30.7.2020
Reproduced from the public record of the Kerala High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.