2022 (2) TMI 657 - HC - GST

Detention of goods alongwith the vehicle - goods detained without giving any reasons and without mentioning any provision of law - HELD THAT - The Court being conscious of the fact that the vehicle and the materials thereon i.e., iron and steel scrap not being perishable and still in the custody of the departmental authorities, ends of justice would be served if, in the presence of the authorized representative of the petitioner, a fresh weighing of the same is undertaken. Let the authorized representative of the petitioner appear before the respondent no.1 on 11.02.2022 i.e., day after tomorrow at 11 00 a.m. Upon him doing so, the vehicle and the materials thereon shall be got weighed in accordance with law. Copy of the same would also be handed over to the representative of the petitioner. Depending upon what comes out of the said exercise, consequences in law shall follow - Petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues involved:
Petitioner seeking release of goods detained by authorities despite having legal documents.

Analysis:
The petitioner moved the Court seeking a Writ of Mandamus to challenge the detention of goods (8695 Kgs of MS Iron) and a vehicle by the First Respondent since 30-12-2021. The petitioner argued that despite having a Tax Invoice and E-Way Bill, the detention was arbitrary and without legal basis. The petitioner contended that the authorities stopped the vehicle after the e-way bill was generated and failed to provide any reasons for detention.

The petitioner's counsel highlighted that no notice was served on the petitioner's representative, and the authorities proceeded against the goods without legal authority. The petitioner's son visited the authorities but faced rude behavior. On the other hand, the respondents argued that there was an excess of 1025 Kgs in the actual weight of the iron and steel scrap compared to what was declared in the tax invoice and e-way bill. They issued a show-cause notice for confiscation under Section 130(1) of the APGST Act.

The petitioner's counsel objected to the weighing report being obtained without their knowledge, arguing that liability cannot be established based on this report. The respondents contended that due to the factual disputes, the Court should not interfere, and the petitioner should address the matter through the statutory authority/forum.

Considering the circumstances, the Court ordered a fresh weighing of the vehicle and materials in the presence of the petitioner's authorized representative. The Court directed the representative to appear before the authorities on a specified date for the weighing process. Depending on the outcome, further legal consequences would follow. The Court disposed of the writ petition without any costs, clarifying that the decision was based on the specific case facts and did not express an opinion on the case's merits. Any pending miscellaneous petitions were also disposed of accordingly.