Detention of goods on ground that consignee was defaulter is not correct

Unitac Energy Solution Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ass. STO (Kerala High Court)

Kerala High Court has held that detention claiming the consignee was a return defaulter for the last five months, is not a valid ground to justify detention under Section 129 of the CGST Act 2017. The High Court quashed the detention notice observing that the reason cited in the detention notice cannot be a ground for detaining consignment of goods in transit.

FULL TEXT OF THE HIGH COURT ORDER / JUDGEMENT

The petitioner is aggrieved by the alleged unlawful seizure and detention of a consignment of goods by the 1st respondent. Ext.P3 is the detention notice issued by the 1st respondent while detaining the said consignment of goods carried on the vehicle bearing Registration No.KL-22D- taxguru.in 2424. The reason for detention is stated to be that the consignee, the petitioner herein, was a return defaulter for the last five months. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as per the provisions of Section 129 of the CGST Act, the reason shown in the detention notice cannot be a ground for detaining a consignment of goods in the course of transit.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.