9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 508X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities concerned for provisional release of the vehicle, which shall be considered by the authorities concerned in accordance with law expeditiously. Petition disposed off. - WRIT PETITION No. 2260 OF 2022 - - - Dated:- 1-2-2022 - HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH AND HON BLE Mr. JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI FOR THE PETITIONER : MR. S. GANESH BABU, ADVOCATE. FOR THE RESPONDENTS NO.1 AND 2: MR. S. A. V. SAI KUMAR, ASSISTANT GOVERNMENT PLEADER, COMMERCIAL TAX. FOR THE RESPONDENT NO.3 : MR. V. MAHESWAR REDDY, GOVERNMENT PLEADER, HOME. JUDGMENT ( Per Hon ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah ) Heard Mr. S. Ganesh Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. S. A. V. Sai Kumar, learned Assistant Govern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rd to movement of the goods being carried by the vehicle i.e., granite slabs was produced when the vehicle was stopped for physical verification. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the owner of the truck and being transporter has nothing to do with the goods as he was hired by the granite factory to transport the granite slabs from Prakasam District to Maharastra. 5. Learned counsel submitted that law does not permit any detention of vehicle as only the concerned consignment/goods is liable to the same. Learned counsel relied upon various judgments of Coordinate Benches in which after putting certain conditions, the vehicle has been directed to be released in favour of the owner. 6. Learned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion under the provisions of the A.P.G.S.T. Act, as admittedly, it was the vehicle in question on which the finished granite was being transported and upon interception, valid papers have not been furnished till date. 7. Learned counsel further submitted that the Supreme Court, in the judgment dated 22.11.2019, in The State of Uttar Pradesh others versus M/s.Kay Pan Fragrance Pvt. Ltd., [(2020) 5 SCC 811] has observed that the High Court ought to have been loathe to entertain the writ petitions questioning the seizure of goods and to issue directions for its release and further that the High Court, in all such cases, ought to have relegated the assessees before the appropriate Authority for complying with the procedure prescribed as a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
