2018 (12) TMI 140 - HC - GST

Detention of goods with vehicle - detention on the ground that E-way bill did not contain the details of the vehicle used for the transport - Held that - The learned Division Bench of this Court in Renji Lal Damodaran v. State Tax Officer 2018 (8) TMI 1145 - KERALA HIGH COURT dealt with an identical issue, where it was held that It is directed to release the goods on the appellant furnishing Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due and a bond for the value of goods in the form as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules. It is directed that respondent authorities to release the petitioner s goods and vehicle on his furnishing Bank Guarantee for tax and penalty found due and a bond for the value of goods in the form as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Detention of goods due to missing details in E-way bill, relief sought by petitioner, applicability of previous judgment in a similar case, direction for release of goods upon furnishing bank guarantee and bond.

Detention of Goods:
The petitioner, a proprietorship firm, faced detention of LED TVs purchased from Mysore due to missing details of the transport vehicle in the E-way bill. This detention led to the filing of a writ petition seeking various reliefs.

Relief Sought by Petitioner:
The petitioner sought the issuance of a writ of certiorari to quash the detention order and notice, along with necessary directions for the release of the detained goods. Additionally, the petitioner requested a writ of mandamus to allow the transport of goods subject to court-fixed conditions and other reliefs deemed fit by the Court.

Applicability of Previous Judgment:
The judgment referred to a previous case, Renji Lal Damodaran v. State Tax Officer, where an identical issue was addressed by the Division Bench of the Court on 6.8.2018. The Court applied the ratio of this judgment to the present case.

Direction for Release of Goods:
In line with the previous judgment, the Court directed the respondent authorities to release the petitioner's goods and vehicle upon the petitioner furnishing a bank guarantee for tax and penalty due, along with a bond for the goods' value as prescribed under Rule 140(1) of the CGST Rules. This direction led to the disposal of the writ petition.

This detailed analysis of the judgment from the Kerala High Court highlighted the issues surrounding the detention of goods, the relief sought by the petitioner, the application of a previous judgment, and the specific direction given for the release of the goods upon fulfillment of certain conditions.