Partly allowed

M/s. Deepam Roadways v. The Assistant Commissioner (St) Adjudication

Madras HC3 Dec 2021WP/25719/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged detention of vehicle due to lack of invoice/E-way bill. Court dismissed writ, directing payment of tax and 50% penalty for release, preserving remedy to appeal under Section 107 of CGST/TNGST Acts.

What did the court decide?

Directed Petitioner to pay disputed tax and 50% pending penalty within two weeks; vehicle release ordered upon compliance; liberty granted to appeal under Section 107.

M/s. Deepam Roadways Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)… — GST and Indirect Tax | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.12.2021

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶5

W.P.NO.25719 OF 2021 AND W.M.P.NO.27161 OF 2021

¶6

(Through Video Conferencing)

¶7

M/s.Deepam Roadways, Represented by its Proprietor, Uma Maheswar, Office at No.56, Kanthappa Chetty Street, Parrys, Chennai – 600 001.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

¶10

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Adjudication Intelligent-I, No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Chennai – 600 006.

¶11

The State Tax Officer RS-VII, Intelligence-II, No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Chennai – 600 006.

¶12

... Respondents

¶13

Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents relating to seizure of vehicle Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-22-BZ-3435 along with the Goods and order of detention passed by the first respondent dated 13.10.2021 vide GST FORM MOV 06 as Ultra Virus and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to release the Lorry bearing Registration No.TN-22-BZ-3435 along with the Goods.

¶14

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Lokeshkumar For Respondents : Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran Government Advocate

¶15

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

ORDER

¶17

Ms.Amirta Poonkodi Dinakaran, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

¶18

The petitioner has challenged the impugned order of the respondents dated 13.10.2021 detaining the goods carrier vehicle bearing Registration No.TN-22-BZ-3435 in which goods were being loaded belonging to the petitioner as it did not accompany a proper invoice or E-way bill.

¶19

It is the case of the petitioner that after the seizure of the goods vehicle, a notice under Section 129(3) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 and Tamil Nadu Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 was issued called which upon the petitioner to show cause as to why a sum of Rs.2,15,778/- and an equal amount of penalty should not be recovered and imposed from the petitioner under the provisions of the respective Acts.

¶20

It is submitted that a notice of personal hearing was fixed on 29.10.2021 in terms of a notice dated 25.10.2021. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner was unable to attend the personal hearing, merely a detention order has been passed on the same date. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is willing to pay/deposit the tax.

¶21

Opposing the prayer, the learned Government Advocate for the respondents submits that the petitioner has an alternate remedy by way of an appeal before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 and the TNGST Act, 2017.

¶22

The matter would require further adjudication by the appropriate authority. Considering the fact that the vehicle has been detained since 13.10.2021, this Writ Petition is disposed by directing the petitioner to pay the disputed tax proposed in the notice and to pay 50% of the proposed penalty within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶23

If such amount is paid, the respondents shall release the goods vehicle to the petitioner. The petitioner is given liberty to workout the remedy on merits before the Appellate Commissioner under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017 and TNGST

¶24

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶25

Act, 2017 who shall consider the same on merits. No costs. Consequently, connected Writ Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

arb/nst

¶31

¶32

The Assistant Commissioner (ST), Adjudication Intelligent-I, No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Chennai – 600 006.

¶33

The State Tax Officer RS-VII, Intelligence-II, No.1, Greams Road, Thousand Light, Chennai – 600 006.

¶34

+1cc to Mr.V.Lokesh Kumar, Advocate, S.R.No.63565

¶35

+1cc to the Special Government Pleader(Taxes), S.R.No.64183

¶36

W.P.No.25719 of 2021 and W.M.P.No.27161 of 2021

¶37

SSV(CO)

¶38

RLP(06/12/2021)

¶39

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

M/s. Deepam Roadways v. The Assistant Commissioner (St) Adjudication

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s. Deepam Roadways v. The Assistant Commissioner (St) Adjudication

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar Higher Vs The Secretary

Thatha Elayalwar Chetty Vs The Commissioner

A.Padmanabhan Vs The Assistant Commissioner(Ct)

M/s.Mohan Conductors Vs The Commercial tax officer

M/s. Shree Krishna Electricals Vs The State Tax Officer

M/s.Rajham Refineries Vs The State Tax Officer