Description Of New Aluminium Section As Aluminium Scrap, Rajasthan High Court Upholds Detention Order

The division bench of Justice Sandeep Mehta and Justice Kuldeep Mathur has observed that the department was justified in detaining the petitioner's vehicle and the goods after noticing the blatant mis-description during interception.

The petitioner has assailed the order by which the vehicle of the petitioner was detained by the officials of the Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Anti-Evasion, Udaipur and also the show cause notice.

The petitioner submitted that the vehicle/goods of the petitioner were illegally detained by the respondent/department while in transit. Aluminum scrap was being transported in the vehicle, and it was falsely shown to be aluminium in the inspection/detention memo.

The petitioner contended that the action of the department was in gross contravention of the procedure provided under Section 68 read with Section 129 of the CGST Act. The department also violated the guidelines and procedures for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement and for detention, release, and confiscation of goods and conveyances issued by the Government of India.

The department contended that it was found that the documents, which were being carried in the vehicle, were with a patently fraudulent declaration that the goods under transit were aluminium scrap, whereas actually brand new aluminium sections wrapped in protective plastic packaging material were being transported. The rate of the scrap as denoted in the E-Way Bill was a mere Rs. 6,42,600, whereas the rate of new aluminium sections weighing 6300 Kgs. would be Rs. 11,02,500.

The court held that an inspecting authority can detain the goods if there is a patent mis-description in the transportation documents to such an extent that it can only be seen as referring to an entirely different commodity.

The court noted that by portraying the goods in transit to be aluminium scrap in the documents, the petitioner was indulging in blatant evasion of GST.

Case Title: M/s. Shrimali Industries Pvt. Ltd. Versus State Of Rajasthan

Case No: D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8892/2018

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Raj) 224 

Dated: 18/08/2022

Counsel For Appellant: Advocate Sharad Kothari

Counsel For Respondent: Advocate Hemant Dutt

Click Here To Read/Download Order