LAWS(KER)-2017-9-77

DHANASWAROOPDAS Vs. ASSISTANT STATE TAX OFFICER

Decided On September 18, 2017
Dhanaswaroopdas Appellant
V/S
Assistant State Tax Officer Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by a detention, of goods that were being transported at his instance, by the authorities under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act (CGST) and State Goods and Services Tax Act (SGST). In the writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the detention as evidenced by Ext.P3 was on the ground that the consignment of goods that was being transported was not accompanied by the necessary declaration in Form KER I, which was mandated for supplies effected in the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he had entrusted the goods to a transporter and the transporter was obliged to file a declaration in Form KER II, and inasmuch the respondents had not enabled the generation of a KER II declaration in the website, it was impossible for the transporter to download the KER II declaration electronically and it was under those circumstances that the detention was necessitated. It is his case that the petitioner cannot be prejudiced on account of a lapse on the part of the respondents in maintaining the necessary infrastructure for enabling assessees/transporters to download the necessary forms electronically.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

(3.) On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the Bar, and taking note of the specific submission of the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, that the adjudication process in connection with the detention can be completed within a week from today, and taking note of the judgment dated 30.08.2017 of the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.1802 of 2017, I direct the 1st respondent to complete the adjudication process in connection with the detention evidenced by Ext.P3 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner and after taking note of Ext.P4 reply submitted by the petitioner.