TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1116X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (2) of the State SGST Rules. Detention also on the ground that goods were intended to be supplied to an unregistered firm - Held that: - The learned Government Pleader, in the circumstances, did not attempt to support the impugned detention on the said reason. Instead, the learned Government Pleader attempted to support the impugned detention on the reason that the delivery chalan that accompanied the goods was not one prepared in accordance with the provisions contained in the State SGST Rules - The defect, if any, of the delivery chalan being not a reason mentioned in Ext.P2 notice, the same cannot be permitted to be urged to sustain the detention, for, the same is not the reason for the detention. The impugned detention is held to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xt.P2 notice is that goods transported by the petitioner are intended to be supplied to an unregistered firm and that therefore, tax evasion is suspected. The detention of the goods in terms of Ext.P2 notice is under challenge in the writ petition. 3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader. 4. In W.P.(C) No.196 of 2018, this Court held that the power of detention contemplated under Section 129 of the SGST Act can be exercised only in respect of goods which are liable to be confiscated under Section 130 of the SGST Act; that there is no taxable supply when goods are transported on delivery chalans so long as the authenticity of the delivery chalan is not doubted and that therefore, such goods ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioned in the said notice. Had the defect highlighted by the learned Government Pleader been a reason for detaining the goods, the same would have certainly found a place in Ext.P2 notice. The defect, if any, of the delivery chalan being not a reason mentioned in Ext.P2 notice, the same cannot be permitted to be urged to sustain the detention, for, the same is not the reason for the detention. It is all the more so, as this Court is not examining the question as to whether the delivery chalan in question is one issued in accordance with the State SGST Rules. 6. In the result, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned detention is held to be illegal and the respondent is directed to release the consignment to the petitioner forthwith. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
