Kerala High Court
Ajith Gopi vs State Of Kerala on 25 July, 2025
2025:KER:55005
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TH
FRIDAY, THE 25 DAY OF JULY 2025 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 27049 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
AJITH GOPI,
AGED 26 YEARS
SON OF GOPI N.C.,
NELLIPPILLIL HOUSE,
KADAMATTOM P.O. KOLENCHERY,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682311
BY ADVS.
DR.K.P.PRADEEP
SHRI.T.T.BIJU
SMT.T.THASMI
SMT.M.J.ANOOPA
SMT.POOJA V.M.
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
TAXES DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695001
2 COMMISSIONER OF GST, KERALA,
KERALA GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
TAX TOWERS, KARAMANA
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695002
W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025
2
2025:KER:55005
3 ASSISTANT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,
ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER,
ENFORCEMENT SQUAD III, ERNAKULAM,
KERALA STATE GOODS AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
2ND FLOOR, SGST COMPLEX, THEVARA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682015
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 25.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025
3
2025:KER:55005
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a registered tax payer under the provisions of the CGST/SGST Act, and this writ petition is submitted by the petitioner being aggrieved by the proceedings initiated under Section 129 of the CGST Act in connection with the detention of certain goods transported by the petitioner.
2. The facts that led to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:
On 11.07.2025, a consignment of scrap materials was made in a vehicle bearing registration No.KL 35A 8148 from the registered place of the petitioner to the purchaser of the same. During the transit, the said vehicle was intercepted at Angamaly by the GST Authorities and Ext.P2 is the Form GST MOV-01, wherein the particulars of goods under the movement and the documents produced at the time of interception were mentioned. It includes the invoice and the E-way Bill. Based on Ext.P2, Ext.P2(a) Form GST MOV-02 order of Physical verification/inspection dated 14.07.2025 was issued which was W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 4 2025:KER:55005 followed by Form GST MOV-06, the order of detention. Now Ext.P3 notice has been issued, under Section 129(3) of GST Act, requiring the petitioner to show cause as to why proceedings under Section 129 shall not be initiated against the petitioner. This writ petition is submitted by the petitioner challenging these proceedings, i.e based on Exts.P2, P2(a), P2(b) and P3.
3. Heard, Dr.Pradeep K.P, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt.Reshmitha R Chandran, the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.
4. The specific contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, the entire proceedings, initiated against the petitioner, are not legally sustainable in view of the fact that even going by the Ext.P2, the statement in Form GST MOV-01, the consignment was accompanied with an invoice and an E-way Bill, which are the only documents required, as contemplated under Rule 138A of the CGST Rules. It is also pointed out that in Ext.P2(b), the reason mentioned is that the goods are not covered by valid documents, without specifying W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 5 2025:KER:55005 the nature of those documents as referred to in Ext.P2. The same discrepancy is reiterated in Ext.P3 as well. It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the proceedings are apparently initiated against the petitioner merely because of the reason that the petitioner failed to produce, at the time of interception, the document by which the petitioner purchased the goods which was from an unregistered dealer.
5. The specific contention of the petitioner is that, as far as the consignment in question is concerned, the obligation as contemplated under Rule 138A, is only to accompany the invoice issued by the petitioner and also the E-way Bill generated by the petitioner at the time of the commencement of the consignment. As far as the goods in transit are concerned, the same was intercepted at a time when the goods were in movement from the registered place of the petitioner to the place of the purchaser. Therefore, the documents as referred to in Ext.P2 would amount to sufficient compliance of the statutory W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 6 2025:KER:55005 requirement contemplated under Rule 138A of CGST Rules and hence no proceedings under Section 129 could have been initiated against him.
6. On the other hand, the learned Government Pleader stoutly opposes the said contention, by placing reliance upon a statement given by the Driver of the conveyance. According to the Driver, at the time when the journey commenced, it was not accompanied by E-way Bill but it was later made available to him, by a third person at Aroor, whereas the interception was made at Angamaly. Therefore, it was pointed out that, the violation is evident and proceedings are justified.
7. After carefully going through the records and hearing the learned counsels on either side, I find merits in the submission put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner. This is particularly because of, in all the documents which form part of the proceedings, the only reason mentioned is that, the transit was not supported with documents whereas, Ext.P2 itself would indicate that, at the time of interception, it was W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 7 2025:KER:55005 accompanied by the invoice and the E-way bill. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the proceedings under Section 129 were sought to be initiated only in view of the fact that the petitioner failed to produce the invoice evidencing the purchase of the petitioner from the unregistered dealer. However, as the vehicle was intercepted during transit from the registered premises of the petitioner to the purchaser of the article from the petitioner, the obligation of the petitioner was to ensure that such transit was accompanied by the documents as contemplated under Rule 138A, which are, invoice issued by the petitioner as well as the E-way bill generated pertaining to the said transportation. Admittedly, at the time of interception, as evidenced by Ext.P2, both the said documents were in existence. As far as the statement referred to by the learned Government Pleader is concerned, the same is a disputed fact. As in none of the notices issued, such an allegation is raised, while considering the sustainability of the notices impugned in this case is being considered, the same W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 8 2025:KER:55005 cannot have any significance. If such a discrepancy was there, that should have been reflected in the notices impugned in this writ petition. Since such a discrepancy was never highlighted in any of the notices/orders/statements the same cannot be pointed out by way of subsequent documents.
In such circumstances, I find that the proceedings initiated as per the impugned notices are not legally sustainable and therefore, an interference is required. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of, quashing Exts.P2, P2(a), P2(b) and P3. However, it is clarified that, this will not preclude the respondents from initiating appropriate proceedings under the Act, if there are any violations on the part of the respondents. In the light of the order quashing the impugned notices as above, the vehicle and goods of the petitioner shall be released forthwith.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE rpk W.P.(C) No.27049 of 2025 9 2025:KER:55005 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 27049/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE DATED 04-06-025 Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE FORM GST MOV 1 DATED 11-07-2025 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, ANGAMALY Exhibit P2(a) TRUE COPY OF THE FORM GST MOV 2 DATED 14-07-2025 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER, ANGAMALY Exhibit P2(b) TRUE COPY OF THE DETENTION ORDER IN FORM GST MOV 06 DATED 14-07-202 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT TAX OFFICER, ANGAMALY Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO ENF/SQD3/EKM/VC/22/025-26 DATED 14-07-
2025 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER
Exhibit P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX INVOICE NO F 34
DATED 11-07-2025
Exhibit P4(a) TRUE COPY OF THE E WAY BILL NO
561843404663 DATED 11-07-2025
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE INVOICE DATED
11-07-2025
Exhibit P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE E WAY BILL NO
541843404456 DATED 11-07-2025
Exhibit P5(b) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE
DRIVER DATED 11-07-2025 BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5(c) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT GIVEN BY THE
APPLICANT DATED 12-07-2025 BEFORE THE
3RD RESPONDENT