TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 884X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is Private Ltd. [ 2023 (2) TMI 587 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ] and the other in M/s. DCM Shriram Limited represented by its Authorised Signatory Mr. Sindha Mohammed Fayaz [ 2023 (1) TMI 788 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ]. In almost similar set of facts, this Court directed the writ petitioner therein, to avail all the alternate remedies available under Section 107 of the GST Act. This Court also took a note of the procedure and remedy available to the writ petitioner, to seek provisional relief of vehicle invoking Section 129(1) of the GST Act. The facts in M/s. Kramski Stamping and Molding Indis Private Ltd. [ 2023 (2) TMI 587 - MADRAS HIGH COURT ], squarely applies to the facts of the present case. In fact, the second respondent has adverted to al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (hereinafter referred to as 'the GST Act'). In the course of business, he had entered into a transaction with a Company in Salem (Consignor) for supply of goods directly to be delivered as per the directions of the customer, namely, SRM Steels at Chennai, to a registered dealer, as per the provisions of the GST Act 2017. The said registered dealer is stated to be one ARM Steel House, having their business at Thindivanam, Tamil Nadu. It is the case of the writ petitioner that the address, as well as GSTIN/UIN details are clearly mentioned in all the tax invoices and e-way bills and the transaction was arranged as a 'Bill to' 'Ship to'. However, the first respondent intercepted the goods vehicle on 26.04.2023 at Sale ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the writ petitioner, to seek provisional relief of vehicle invoking Section 129(1) of the GST Act. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of this Court dated 04.11.2022 passed in WP.No.29281 of 2022 . According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the facts in the said Writ Petition were almost identical to the facts of the present case and this Court had quashed the impugned order and released the detained consignment forthwith. 7. This Court has carefully gone into both the orders referred to by the learned counsels, one in WP.No.4217 of 2023 and the other in WP.No.29281 of 2022. The facts in WP.No.4217 of 2023, squarely applies to the facts of the present case. In fact, the second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
