Pact Machines PVT. LTD vs. The Assistant 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 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 9TH KARTHIKA, 1941 WP(C).No.29135 OF 2019(N) PETITIONER: PACT MACHINES PVT. LTD DOOR NO. VII/267 A. MALIKAMPEEDIKA, ALANGAD P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, 683 511, REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, GIRISH V.B. BY ADV. SRI.RAMESH CHERIAN JOHN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER (INTELLIGENCE) STATE GST DEPARTMENT, SQUAD NO. 1, MATTANCHERRY AT MINI CIVIL STATION, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM 683 101. 2 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, MATTANCHERRY AT ALUVA, ERNAKULAM 683 101. 3 THE COMMISSIONER, STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWER, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 002. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.THUSHARA JAMES THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C) No.29135/19 2 JUDGMENT The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P10 order of detention, and Ext.P11 adjudication order that followed, imposing a liability to tax and penalty on the petitioner under the CGST and SGST Acts. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that, while the detention is sought to be justified on the ground that the petitioner had failed to produce the e-Way Bill as per Rule 138 of the CGST and SGST Rules, 2017, at the time when the vehicle was intercepted by the authorities, and further it was found that the vehicle was plying in a wrong direction when compared with the destination shown in the invoice, an e-Way Bill was actually available with the driver of the vehicle and the findings in the detention notice are contrary to facts. That apart, it is stated that simultaneous with the issuance of the detention notice, Ext.P11 order confirming the demand of tax and penalty was also passed, without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard.
I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.
On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made across the Bar, I take note of the submission of learned Government Pleader, on instruction, that at the time of detention the driver of the vehicle did not produce any e-Way Bill, either manual or electronic, corresponding to the goods that were carried on in the vehicle. It is further pointed out that a statement was given by the driver before the authorities wherein he had stated that there was no e-Way Bill with him. Under the said
W.P(C) No.29135/19 3 circumstances, prima facie there appears to be a justification for the detention of the vehicle. I find, however, that there was no opportunity granted to the petitioner to rebut the inferences drawn by the authorities while detaining the goods, through a hearing afforded to the petitioner before passing Ext.P11 order confirming the demand of tax and penalty on the petitioner. I, therefore, quash Ext.P11 order and direct the 1st respondent to pass fresh orders in lieu of Ext.P11 within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The order to be passed by the 1st respondent shall clearly deal with the contention of the petitioner that an e-Way Bill had actually been produced before the detaining authority and give reasons for the orders to be passed by him. I also make it clear that if the petitioner seeks to get the goods released pending the adjudication before the 1st respondent, he may do so by furnishing a bank guarantee for the amounts covered by detention notice. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition and a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for further action. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
okb //// P.S. to Judge
W.P(C) No.29135/19 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 AOF THE FIRM ORDER OF PURCHASE OF THE EQUIPMENT WITH THE PETITIONER DT. 21.10.2019. EXHIBIT P2 AOF THE PURCHASE ORDER DT. 22.10.2019 ISUSED TO VOLVO GROUP INDIA PVT. LTD. EXHIBIT P3 AOF THE TAX INVOICE DT. 22.10.2019 OF VOLVO GROUP INDIA PVT. LTD IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 AOF THE E- WAY BILL DT. 23.10.2019 WHICH IS VALID UP TO 29.10.2019. EXHIBIT P5 AOF THE CONSIGNMENT NOTE WHICH ACCOMPANYING THE TRANSPORT WITH CONSIGNMENT DATED 23.10.2019. EXHIBIT P6 AOF THE INVOICE DT. 24.10.2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO AF INFRASTRUCTURE PVT. LTD. EXHIBIT P7 AOF THE PURPORTED STATEMENT TAKEN FROM THE DRIVER IN FORM GST MOV- 01 DT. 25.10.2019. EXHIBIT P8 AOF THE ORDER FOR PHYSICAL VERIFICATION/ INSPECTION INFORM GST MOV- 02 ISSUED ON 25.10.2019. EXHIBIT P9 AOF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 26.10.2019 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 AOF THE ORDER OF DETENTION INFORM GST MOV 06 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 AOF THE ORDER IMPOSING TAX AND PENALTY DT. 25.10.2019 IN FROM GST MOV. 09.
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.