2018 Taxo.online 20
W.P.(C) No.2666 of 2018 dated 24.01.2018
M/s K. L. JOHAR & CO. & GENERAL TRANSPORT
STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
2018
GST
Central Goods & Services Tax Act, 2017
129
P. B. Suresh Kumar, Justice
In favour of assessee
High Court
Kerala
Represented by: –
Petitioner: – Sri. Manu Ramachandran & Sri. T. S. Sarath
Respondent: – V. K. Shamsudheen
Order: –
When this Court entertained a doubt as to whether the petitioners in this writ petition can maintain a joint writ petition, the learned counsel for the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition in so far as it relates to the second petitioner, without prejudice to the right of the second petitioner to file a fresh writ petition.
- Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the permission sought by the learned counsel for the petitioners is granted.
- Heard the learned counsel for the first petitioner as also the learned Government Pleader.
- The case of the first petitioner is that certain goods have been consigned by M/s.GlaxoSmithKline through the second petitioner transporter to the first petitioner as also to a distributor at Ottappalam; that the crew of the vehicle interchanged the documents of the goods to be delivered to the first petitioner and to the distributor at Ottappalam; that the conveyance and the goods intended to be delivered to the distributor at Ottappalam were detained by the second respondent under Section 129 of the Central Goods and Services Tax and the Kerala State Goods and Services Act on account of the discrepancy of the documents, and the first petitioner has been given Ext.P1 notice directing them to show cause why action shall not be taken against them under Section 129 of the CGST and SGST Acts.
- According to the first petitioner, they have received the goods and the documents of the goods intended to be delivered over to the distributor at Ottappalam; that there is absolutely nothing wrong with the documents and that therefore, proceedings shall not be initiated against them.
- The grievance voiced by the first petitioner is one to be raised before the adjudicating authority under Section 129 of the CGST and SGST Acts. In the said view of the matter, the writ petition is disposed of directing the second respondent to complete the proceedings initiated in terms of Ext.P1 notice against the first petitioner within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.
