9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 171X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .P6 order and Ext.P7 notice and to quash them; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, orders or directions, directing the 1st respondent to release the goods to the petitioner without collecting any tax or penalty or security under S.129(1)(c);" 2. Sri. K.N. Sreekumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Dr. Thushara James, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 3. The case projected in this Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:- The petitioner is a dealer in plywood, particle boards and allied items registered under the CGST & KGST Acts on migration to the GST regime with effect from 1.7.2017. In the regular course of business, petitioner's main supplier M/s. Rukmoni Boards Pvt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and untenable. It is also submitted that as per the provisions in Sec.126 of the GST Act dealing with the general disciplines related to penal proceedings are not to be initiated for minor breaches of tax regulations or procedural requirements, omission or mistake in documentation. Despite filing convincing explanation, the 1st respondent is not inclined to release the goods without payment of tax and penalty. In the light of these averments and contentions, the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Civil) with the aforementioned prayers. 4. Sri. K.N. Sreekumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would strongly urge that though in Ext.P1 invoice, the element of tax happened to be wrongly shown as CGST and SGST @ 9% a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he simple reason that the fundamental and basic document, which is the E-Way bill issued under 138 of the GST Rules, has correctly shown that the IGST tax at the rate of 18% and that the due tax amount of Rs. 1,20,985/- is also shown and the said amount fully reflect 18% of the taxable value in the present transaction. Further, Sri. K.N. Sreekumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would pertinently take this Court's attention to Ex.P2 E-Way bill given on page No.11 of the paper book of the writ petition, wherein, in coloumn No.3 as against taxable amount, the figures are shown as Rs. 5,80,018.76 and Rs. 92,120.80, thus totalling to Rs. 6,72,139.56/-. It is further pointed out that the figures given immediately under the ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e CGST Act deals with the levy and collection of tax and Sec.12 deals with time of supply of goods. As per Sec.12 (1) the liability to pay tax on goods shall arise at the time of supply as determined in accordance with the provisions of the section. These provisions would go to show that the liability to pay tax on the interstate supply of goods u/s7 of the IGST Act would arise at the time of supply of the goods by the supplier on raising Ext-P1 invoice and Ext-P2 E-Way bill. Sec.37 of the CGST Act provides that every registered person shall furnish electronically the returns showing the outward supply of goods as prescribed in Rule 59 of the CGST Rules. Sec.39 provides for furnishing returns electronically showing the inward and outward su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ility by filing true and correct returns and payment of tax. The interstate supply of goods in question being entered in the KVATIS Portal by the supplier electronically through valid E-Way bill which cannot be altered, any possibility of evasion of tax will not arise at all. 6. After hearing both sides and after careful evaluation of the facts and circumstances of the case, it is to be noted that the matter in relation to the detention of the goods as per the impugned Ext.P7 proceedings will have to be subjected to adjudication proceedings and only thereafter it can be finalised. Therefore, this Court need not make any final pronouncement on any of the above said issues. It is for the petitioner to raise all those contentions as and when ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sri. K.L. Sreekumaran, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the basic supplier is in Tamil Nadu and since the transaction was on 10.1.2020, the time limit for them to file the returns in that regard under the IGST Act is upto 20th of next month, which is in the instant case would be 20.02.2020. Further that steps will be taken by the petitioner to ascertain whether the local supplier in Tamil Nadu has filed the return in that regard in relation to the above said transaction etc. Therefore, it may be better for the 1st respondent to wait till 20.02.2020 before the opportunity of personal hearing is granted to the petitioner for finalisation of the adjudication proceedings pursuant to Ext.P10 order. The petitioner may take steps ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
