The Calcutta High Court held that Teak Sawn timber is “Natural Produce” and quashed the detention order due to a discrepancy in mentioning “Nature of Goods” in the E-Way Bill.
Md. Yusuf, the appellant challenged the detention order dated 10th August 2022 passed under Section 129(1) of the CGST Act and WBGST Act. The Single Bench held that the order of detention is an appealable order and the appellant can approach the appellate authority.
On perusal of the order of detention dated 10th August 2022, it was observed that there is more than one allegation. It was alleged that there is a mismatch between the goods in movement and documents tendered and further alleged that the appellant had obtained registration under the WBGST Act through fraudulent documentation.
Further, observed that the teak-sawn timber was transported without valid documents in a concealed manner in contravention of Section 68 of CGST Act 2017 and WBGST Act 2017 read with Section 138A of the Act.
Mr Shraff, advocate appearing for the appellant contended that the appellant is the owner of the goods and had a transit permit issued by the Forest Department along with invoices and an e-way bill. Further contended that the appellant has got sufficient material to show that registration was obtained by placing valid documents.
Mr Ghosh, Government Counsel submitted that to date the department does not know who is the owner of the goods and, therefore, an ID was created in the name of the driver and all orders were uploaded in his name, namely, Mani N.
The Court observed that as goods have not yet been confiscated till date, therefore, the first remedy available to the appellant is to approach the authority who passed the detention order and seek to revoke the order and of detention by answering all the allegations which have been found and recorded in the detention order dated 10th August 2022.
Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya observed that if there is any discrepancy in goods the State Tax Authority is directed to obtain an opinion from the Forest Department by requesting one of their officers to inspect the goods in the place where it has been detained.
The Court held that “since the goods being natural products, it is exposed to the fury of weather, there is the likelihood of deterioration. Therefore the authority pending compliance with the above directions shall permit the appellant to provide a requisite number of tarpolene for securing the goods so that the goods are not exposed to sun and rain.”
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
