K.M.Oil Industries Vs Assistant State Tax officer (Kerala High Court)
The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P2 order of detention and Ext.P3 notice issued to him in Form GST MOV-7 in connection with the detention of a consignment of goods that was being transported at his instance. On a perusal of Ext.P2 order, it is seen that the reason for detention was that the route described in the e-way bill did not match with the route by which the goods were actually being transported. It is therefore that the stand of the respondent that the transportation of the goods was not supported by a valid e-way bill. On considering the said objection of the respondent, I find that the detention in question cannot be said to be unjustified.
Taking note of the request of the petitioner, however, I direct that if the petitioner furnishes a bank guarantee for the amount demanded in Ext.P3, the respondent shall permit the petitioner to clear the goods and the vehicle, and thereafter pass the final order under S.129 of the Act. The learned Government Pleader shall communicate the gist of this order to the respondent so as to enable the petitioner to clear the goods on the condition aforementioned. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition together with a copy of the judgment before the respondent for further action.
