M/S. Lalitha Traders vs The Deputy Assistant ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 729 AP

        HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

       THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH

                                AND

          THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE RAVI NATH TILHARI

                  WRIT PETITION No.944 OF 2022

M/s. Lalitha Traders,
Rep. by its Proprietor, E. Prasad,
5-4-77, Lakshmipuram,
Hindupur, Anantapur District,
A.P. - 515201.                         ...         Petitioner


                                     Versus

1. The Deputy Assistant Commissioner,
   O/o. Assistant Commissioner (ST),
   Ananthapur-I Circle, II Floor, PAR Heights,
   Gooty Road, Ananthapur,
   Anantapur District, A.P.

2. The Assistant Commissioner (ST),
   Hindupur Circle, Anantapuramu Division,
   Dhanalakshmi Road, Hindupur,
   Anantapur District, A.P.

3. The State of Andhra Pradesh,
   Rep. by Principal Secretary to the
   Government, Revenue (GST) Department,
   Secretariat Buildings, Velagapudi,
   Guntur District, A.P.              ...          Respondents

Counsel for the petitioner : Mr. G. Narendra Chetty, Advocate

Counsel for the respondents : Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, Government Pleader, Commercial Tax

ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 09.02.2022

(Per Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah)

Heard Mr. G. Narendra Chetty, learned counsel for the

petitioner and Mr. Y. N. Vivekananda, learned Government

Pleader, Commercial Tax, for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has moved the Court for the following relief:

"........ to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or

Direction, more particularly in the nature of MANDAMUS

holding that the action of the First Respondent in

stopping and detaining the goods of the Petitioner (8695

Kgs of MS Iron) along with Vehicle no. AP 02 T 3445,

since 30-12-2021, even though they are duly covered

and accompanied by Tax Invoice and E-Way Bill,

without giving any reasons and without mentioning any

provision of law and not releasing the goods so far as

arbitrary, capricious, without authority or jurisdiction,

abuse and misuse of official position and illegal and

consequently direct the First Respondent to release the

said goods along with the vehicle forthwith and pass

such other order or orders as may be deemed fit and

proper in the circumstances of the case and in the

interests of justice."

3. The contention of the petitioner is that the vehicle and the

scrap materials loaded on it were illegally detained and kept in the

custody of the authorities despite having all the legal documents

for such transportation.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on

30.12.2021 e-way bill was generated at 09:22 p.m. with regard to

the vehicle and the materials and on way it was stopped by the

authorities at 11:33 p.m. and detained despite them showing the

tax invoice as well as the e-way bill to the authorities. Further, it

was submitted that thereafter no notice was served on the

authorized representative of the petitioner and still the authorities

have proceeded against the vehicle and the materials loaded on it

without authority of law. It was submitted that the son of the

proprietor of the petitioner firm had even visited the authorities on

01.01.2022 and 02.01.2022 but due to the rude behaviour by the

authorities, he had to return.

5. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the basis of the

counter-affidavit filed by him, submitted that incorrect statements

have been advanced inasmuch as there was no occasion for the

authorities to misbehave with the son of the proprietor of the

petitioner firm as everything was on record. It was submitted that

the factual position is that despite the petitioner having e-way bill

and tax invoice, the same were in relation to only 8695 Kgs of the

iron and steel scrap, whereas upon actual verification, by getting

the same weighed, it came to 1025 Kgs in excess of what was

disclosed in the tax invoice and e-way bill. Thus, it was submitted

that, since there is excess quantity, the petitioner is liable to be

proceeded against under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh

Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (hereinafter referred to as the

'APGST Act'). It was submitted that finally show-cause notice in the

form of GST MOV-10 have been issued and served on the

petitioner through the mode of service as contemplated under the

statute, proposing to move for confiscation invoking power under

Section 130(1) of the APGST Act.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since

the report with regard to weighing of the vehicle and the materials

thereon has been obtained behind its back, no liability can be

fastened on the basis of the same.

7. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that, in

any view of the matter, since even basic facts are in dispute, this

Court may not interfere in the matter and the petitioner should be

relegated to the statutory authority/forum where these matters

can be well thrashed out.

8. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case

and submissions of learned counsel for the parties, the Court

being conscious of the fact that the vehicle and the materials

thereon i.e., iron and steel scrap not being perishable and still in

the custody of the departmental authorities, ends of justice would

be served if, in the presence of the authorized representative of the

petitioner, a fresh weighing of the same is undertaken.

9. Accordingly, let the authorized representative of the

petitioner appear before the respondent no.1 on 11.02.2022 i.e.,

day after tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. Upon him doing so, the vehicle

and the materials thereon shall be got weighed in accordance with

law. Copy of the same would also be handed over to the

representative of the petitioner. Depending upon what comes out of

the said exercise, consequences in law shall follow. The writ

petition is, accordingly, disposed of. No order as to costs.

10. It is made clear that this order has been passed in the

special facts and circumstances of the case and the Court has not

expressed any opinion on the merits of the matter.

11. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, also stand

disposed of.

_______________________________ (AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J)

_________________________ (RAVI NATH TILHARI, J)

Note:

Issue C.C. by 10.02.2022.

Dsh