2017 Taxo.online 31
WP(C).No. 31328 of 2017 (M) dated 04.10.2017
M/s ASCICS TRADING COMPANY
THE ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER
2017
GST
Integrated Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017 & CGST Act 2017
4 & 20 and 6
CGST Rules
138
27/2017- Central Tax
A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, Justice
Interim
High Court
Kerala
Detained goods released – Detention of goods for not carrying the prescribed documents under the IGST Act – Power to prescribe documents for inter-state trade conferred with Central Government, but till date not notified – Under the said circumstances, neither the State Legislature nor the State Government would have the power to make laws/rules to govern interstate movements of goods.
Represented by: –
Petitioner: – Advs. Sri. K. J. Abraham & Sri. Nikhil John
Respondent: – Sri. C. E. Unnikrishnan
Order: –
It is brought to my notice by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that pursuant to the interim order dated 28.09.2017, the goods belonging to the petitioner, as also the vehicle carrying the goods, were released on a production of the interim order before the respondent.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. To a pointed query as to the power of the State Government to detain goods for alleged non compliance with the requirement of carrying the prescribed documents under the IGST
Act, which is the basis for the detention in Ext.P5 notice impugned in the writ petition, the learned Government Pleader would take me through the provisions of the IGST Act, CGST Act and SGST Act and in particular, the provisions of Section 4 and Section 20 of the IGST Act and Section 6 of the CGST Act read with Rule 138 of the CGST Rules as amended by notification No.27/2017 – Central Tax for the purposes of pointing out that, although the power to prescribe the documents that are to accompany the transportation of goods in the course of interstate trade is conferred on the Central Government, the Central Government has, till date, not notified the documents that have to be carried by a transporter of the goods in the course of interstate movement. Under the said circumstances, and finding that neither the State Legislature nor the State Government would have the power to make laws/rules to govern interstate movements of goods in the course of trade, and for the purposes of levy of tax, I am of the view that detention in Ext.P5, for the sole reason that the transportation was not accompanied by the prescribed documents under the IGST Act/CGST Act/CGST Rules, cannot be legally sustained. I therefore, allow the writ petition by making the interim order absolute.
