The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging confiscation of gold ornaments due to transport without required documentation. The court held that the officer's satisfaction of tax evasion, supported by circumstances, precluded writ interference.
Writ petition dismissed; confiscation order stands.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 3RD KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 9992 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
U.S.GIRISH PROPRIETOR, M/S. S.G.DIAMONDDS AND JEWELLERS, 715-716, KRISHNA STREET, EDAYAR STREET, COIMBATORE, TAMIL NADU-641001. BY ADVS. SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO.VII, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD-678001. 2 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KILLIPPALAM, KARAMANA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.
BY DR.THUSHARA JAMES, SR.GOVT. PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:2:-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
W.P.(C) No.9992 of 2021
Dated this the 25th day of October, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner is a dealer in gold jewellery. He challenges the proceedings initiated under section 130 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short 'the Act').
gold ornaments to Mangalore by train. When he reached near the Palakkad Junction Railway Station, a search was conducted by the Railway Police Force and gold ornaments were detected and seized from the petitioner. Intimation was given to the GST department consequent to which proceedings were initiated under sections 129 and 130 of the Act, since petitioner had apparently omitted to carry the delivery chalan
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:3:-
was closed reserving liberty of the petitioner to challenge the fresh proceedings.
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:4:-
the decision in Gokul P.G. and Ors. v. The State of Kerala and Ors. [(2021) 88 GSTR 282 (Kerala)], the confiscation ought not to have been initiated when there was no intention to evade tax. It was argued that other than a mere expression in words by the Proper Officer in Ext.P5 that “there was an intention to evade tax”, there was nothing on record to come to a statutory conclusion regarding any attempt to evade tax. It was further pointed out that the omission to carry the delivery challan by itself may only warrant an imposition of penalty and not confiscation of goods and therefore, the impugned order was liable to be set aside.
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:5:-
disputes and the satisfaction of the Proper Officer regarding evasion of tax, this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ought not to interfere.
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:6:-
the particular case constitute an intention to evade tax or not is a matter within the realm of satisfaction of the Proper Officer. Interference in the satisfaction exercised by the Proper Officer, when the conclusion is supported by the circumstances surrounding the transaction, warrants no interference by this Court, as otherwise, the scheme and purport of the Act will be affected.
In view of the above, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and the same is dismissed.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE
vps
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:7:-
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9992/2021
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS
| EXHIBIT P1 | COPY O |
F | REGISTRATION C |
ERTIFICATE |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ISSUED TO | THE | PETITIONER DATED | 2.8.2018. | |
| EXHIBIT P2 | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN JANUARY 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(a) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN FEBRUARY 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(b) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN MARCH 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(c) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN APRIL 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(d) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN MAY 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(e) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN JUNE 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(f) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN JULY 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(g) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN AUGUST 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(h) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN SEPTEMBER 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(i) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN OCTOBER 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(j) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN NOVEMBER 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(k) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN DECEMBER 2020. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(l) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN JANUARY 2021. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P2(m) | COPY OF THE MONTH |
FORM OF |
GSTR-3B RETURN FEBRUARY 2021. |
FILED FOR |
| EXHIBIT P3 | COPY OF BY PETITI |
THE ONER |
DELIVERY CHALLAN DATED 3.3.2021. |
GENERATED |
W.P.(C) No.9992/21
-:8:-
| EXHIBIT P4 COPY 1ST |
OF FORM GST RESPONDENT DAT |
MOV-01 ISSUED BY THE ED 4.3.2021. |
|---|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P4(a) COPY 1ST |
OF FORM GST RESPONDENT DAT |
MOV-02 ISSUED BY THE ED 4.3.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P4(b) COPY 1ST |
OF FORM GST RESPONDENT DAT |
MOV-04 ISSUED BY THE ED 4.3.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P4(c) COPY 1ST |
OF FORM GST RESPONDENT DAT |
MOV-10 ISSUED BY THE ED 4.3.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P5 COPY BY T |
OF ORDER NO.V HE 1ST RESPOND |
C/VII/405/20-21 ISSUED ENT DATED 20.3.2021. |
| EXHIBIT P6 COPY 1ST |
OF FINAL INT RESPONDENT TO |
IMATION ISSUED BY THE THE PETITIONER |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether absence of a delivery challan while transporting gold ornaments without contraband evidence satisfies statutory requirement to initiate confiscation proceedings.
Whether appellate remedy under section 107 precludes writ jurisdiction under Article 226 when officer's finding on tax evasion is supported by surrounding circumstances.
Whether finding of intention to evade tax based on lack of mandatory documents warrants judicial review or constitutes a factual conclusion unsuitable for Article 226 intervention.
4 provisions across 1 enactments
U.S.GIRISH PROPRIETOR, M/S. S.G.DIAMOND DS AND JEWELLERS
THE STATE TAX OFFICER SQUAD NO.VII
THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
