Kerala High Court
Shahul Hameed. A vs The Assistant State Tax Officer on 16 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 25TH BHADRA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 19250 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
SHAHUL HAMEED. A
AGED 56 YEARS
PROPRIETOR, M/S.S.S.TRADING,
13/23-C, ONGALLUR, PATTAMBI,PALAKKAD.
BY ADVS.
HARISANKAR V. MENON
MEERA V.MENON
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
SQUAD NO.VII, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
PALAKKAD-678001.
2 THE STATE TAX OFFICER
SQUAD NO.VII, STATE GOODS AND SERVICES TAX DEPARTMENT,
PALAKKAD-678001.
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATA TAX,
STATE GST DEPARTMENT, TAX TOWERS, KILLIPPALAM,
KARAMANA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695002.
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER DR.THUSHARA JAMES
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.19250 of 2021
2
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No.19250 of 2021
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th day of September, 2021
JUDGMENT
Petitioner challenges Ext.P7 order issued by the 2 nd
respondent under section 130 of the Central Goods and Services
Tax Act, 2017 ('CGST Act' for short). As per the impugned order,
the goods and conveyance detained by the 1 st respondent on
18.07.2021 at Shornur Railway Station, have been ordered to be
confiscated under section 130 of CGST Act.
2. Petitioner challenges Ext.P7 invoking the extraordinary
jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India on various
grounds. The grounds raised by the petitioner under five different
heads are all matters which can be adjudicated under section 107 of
CGST Act, which provides for an appellate remedy. The contentions
canvassed by the petitioner require an appreciation of facts and
hence do not warrant consideration by this Court in exercise of the
powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
3. Even in the recent judgment of the Supreme Court in
W.P.(C) No.19250 of 2021
Assistant Commissioner of State Tax and Others v.
M/s.Commercial Steel Ltd. (C.A. No.5121 of 2021) it was held that
the existence of an alternate remedy, though not a bar to the
maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India, a writ petition must be entertained only in exceptional
circumstances that too when there is a breach of fundamental rights
or violation of the principles of natural justice or if the order is
passed in excess of jurisdiction or when there is a challenge to the
constitutionality of the statute. None of the circumstances
mentioned above exists in the instant case and hence the remedy of
the petitioner is to exhaust statutory remedies.
Accordingly, I find no merit in the writ petition and the same is
dismissed, reserving the liberty of the petitioner to pursue the
statutory remedies available.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
AJ/16.09.2021
W.P.(C) No.19250 of 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19250/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 COPY OF INVOICE NO.B-48 ISSUED BY THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P2 COPY OF E-WAY BILL GENERATED BY THE
PETITIONER
Exhibit P3 COPY OF FORM GST MOV 01 STATEMENT OF
THE OWNER/ PERSON-IN-CHARGE OF THE
GOODS ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P3(A) COPY OF FORM GST MOV 02 ORDER FOR
PHYSICAL VERTIFICATION/INSPECTION OF
THE CONVEYANCE, GOODS AND DOCUMENTS
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P4 COPY OF THE NOTICE IN FORM GST MOV-10
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P5 COPY OF LETTER IS SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6 COPY OF ORDER IN WP(C)NO.15307/2021 OF
THIS HON'BLE COURT
Exhibit P7 COPY OF ORDER IN FORM GST MOV 11 ISSUED
BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P8 COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.21907/2020
OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
