Kerala High Court
Y. Balakrishnan vs The Enforcement Officer, Enforcement ... on 21 March, 2025
Author: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
Bench: A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar
WA No.546 of 2025 1 2025:KER:24736
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1946
WA NO. 546 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.2.2025 IN WP(C) NO.30274 OF
2024 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER :
Y. BALAKRISHNAN
AGED 53 YEARS
PROPRIETOR, ONAM BEEDI COMPANY, 1/395,
THAYYILRAMAPURAM, KAYAMKULAM,
ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA, PIN690508
RESIDING AT IV/1305, MAIN ROAD, VALLOM,
THIRUNELVELI DISTRICT, TAMIL NADU, PIN - 628009
BY ADVS.
K.SRIKUMAR (SR.)
AMMU CHARLES
K.MANOJ CHANDRAN
S.A.MANSOOR (PATTANAM)
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS :
1 THE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, ENFORCEMENT SQUAD,
KOLLAM,SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
ASRAMAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691002
2 THE ASSISTANT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER,
ENFORCEMENT SQUAD, KOLLAM,
SGST DEPARTMENT, TAX COMPLEX,
ASRAMAM, KOLLAM, PIN - 691002
3 THE COMMISSIONER OF STATE GOODS
AND SERVICE TAX DEPARTMENT,
9TH FLOOR, TAX TOWER, KILLIPPALAM,
KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN - 695002
WA No.546 of 2025 2 2025:KER:24736
4 STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
5 THE CENTRAL BOARD OF INDIRECT TAXES AND CUSTOMS,
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER GST,
GST POLICY WING, NO.503, B WING, 5TH FLOOR, CBIC,
HUDCOVISHALA BUILDING, BHIKAJI CAMA PLACE,
R. K. PURAM, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110066
6 UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
FINANCE DEPARTMENT, RAJPATH MARG,
CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110001
SRI. V. GIRISHKUMAR-SC,
SRI. R. HARISHANKAR- DSGI
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2025,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA No.546 of 2025 3 2025:KER:24736
JUDGMENT
Easwaran S., J.
This intra court appeal is preferred by the appellant/petitioner
aggrieved by the judgment dated 28.2.2025 in W.P.(C) No.30274 of 2024.
2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the appeal are as
follows:
The appellant approached the writ court challenging a notice for
confiscation of goods issued under Section 130 of the Central Goods and
Services Tax Act, 2017 ('the Act', for short). The Single Bench, who
considered the writ petition at the admission stage, did not grant any
interim relief and therefore, the proceedings before the statutory
authority continued and culminated in the order of confiscation. The writ
petition was subsequently amended and the final order of adjudication
was also challenged. Before the Single Bench, it was contended by the
appellant that the order of confiscation was passed without any authority
of law inasmuch as no ingredients for confiscation of the goods under
Section 130 of the Act has been made out. The petitioner had generated
an e-invoice and e-way bill for the supply of 10 bags of beedies to M/s
Alna Stores at Thiruvalla. These documents were uploaded in the GST
Portal also. It was contended that, at the time of interception, the goods
were covered by proper invoices and e-way bills and that, the IGST on
the transaction has already been paid, which is already on the radar of
WA No.546 of 2025 4 2025:KER:24736
GST network and therefore the confiscation of the goods and the
conveyance merely for the reason of a deviation in the route, was without
authority. It was further contended that the final order of adjudication
was vitiated since no opportunity to cross examine the statements which
were obtained from the 3rd parties was given by the proper officer. The
learned Single Judge who considered the writ petition found that the
adjudication on merits would necessarily involves adjudication of the
disputed questions on fact and therefore relegated the writ petitioner to
avail the statutory remedy of appeal available under the Act.
3. Heard Sri. K.Srikumar, the learned Senior counsel appearing
for the appellant assisted by Smt.Ammu Charles, Sri. G Girish Kumar the
learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5th respondent,
Sri.R.Harishankar, the learned DSGI appearing for the 6th respondent
and Smt. Resmitha Ramachandran the learned Government Pleader
appearing on behalf of the State respondents 1 to 4.
4. On consideration of the rival submissions raised across the Bar,
we are of the considered view that there is no merit in the appeal. The
contention of the appellant/writ petitioner revolves on the adjudication
of the disputed questions of facts inasmuch as the contention is pointed
towards the generation of e-way bills, invoices and also remittance of
GST and also IGST. The further contention that the cross examination of
the 3rd parties, whose statements were recorded by the proper officer
while passing the final order of adjudication, was not extended to the
WA No.546 of 2025 5 2025:KER:24736
appellant also does not impress us since it is open for the appellant to
raise this contention before the appellate authority.
5. We find that the question as to whether the final adjudication
order is vitiated for want of compliance of principles of natural justice is
also a point which could be raised before the appellate and the appellate
authority is also empowered to go into the said question and pass
appropriate orders. The assertion of the appellant that no reasons are
warranted for confiscation of the goods is essentially a disputed question
of facts which has to be adjudicated by the appellate authority.
Therefore, we are of the considered view that the learned Single Judge
was perfectly justified in declining to exercise its discretionary
jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition. We are of the view that
inasmuch as the learned Single Judge has not thought it fit to exercise
his discretion and entertain the writ petition, we need not interfere with
the said judgment in an intra-court appeal.
Accordingly, we are of the considered view that the writ appeal
lacks merit, and the same is dismissed.
Sd/-
DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
NS JUDGE
