SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Kar) 2795

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.
M/S Hysum Steel, Represented By Its Partner, Ahmed Shakeer, Son Of Sri Haji M.S Moosabba - Petitioner 
Versus
The Joint Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes, (Appeals)-Mangaluru – Respondent 
Writ Petition No. 8775 of 2024 (T-RES)
Decided On : 05-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Sri. Mohammed Monish Sowkar, Advocate
For the Respondent: Sri. K. Hema Kumar, AGA

Minor deviations in transport routes without intent to evade tax do not warrant harsh penalties; authorities should impose general penalties for trivial lapses in compliance with the Goods and Services Tax laws.

Headnote:(A) Karnataka Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 - Sections 107(11), 125, and 129 - Quashing of penalty order - Petitioner challenges detention of goods based on route deviation; court finds no malafide intention; penalty under Section 129 not warranted where minor discrepancies are present - Circular No. 64/38/2018 directs authorities to impose general penalty for minor lapses, not detention. (Paras 4, 5, 66, 70)

(B) Fundamental Rights - Article 19(1)(g) and Article 301 - Right to movement endorsed in regulation of trade - No statutory basis found for mandating strict route adherence in transit of goods - Discretion of authorities not to exceed legal bounds examined. (Paras 6, 7, 66)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner consigned goods from supplier, but the vehicle deviated from the route inadvertently during transit, leading to detention by authorities for alleged non-compliance with transport regulations, invoking penalties under the KGST Act. (Paras 3, 4)

Findings of Court:
Detention of conveyance and penalty quashed; petitioner ordered to pay a general penalty; no illegal intent established in deviation nor any mandatory rule for strict adherence to the previous route. (Paras 70, 71)

Issues: Scope of penalty under KGST Act for mere route deviations; definition of malafide intent in the context of transport regulations and the applicability of general versus specific penalties. (Paras 4, 5, 6)

Ratio Decidendi: Court emphasizes that minor deviations should not attract severe penalties; transport regulations should facilitate trade while ensuring compliance without coercive measures, affirming no established law restricts route alterations during transit. (Paras 69, 70)

Result: Writ Petition allowed. Penalty and detention orders quashed with direction for general penalty payment instead. (Paras 71)

ORDER :

S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR, J.

In this petition, petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:-

“ i) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a Writ or certiorari quashing the order passed by the Respondent No.1 in Form GST-APL-4, bearing Appeal No. IGST/122/2022-23 dated: 22.12.2023 under Section 107(11) of the KARNATAKA GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ACT , 2017 and Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 herein marked as Annexure-A.

ii) Issue a writ of Certiorari or direction in the nature of a Writ or certiorari quashing the penalty order passed by the Respondent No.2 levying penalty on the petitioner in FORM GST MOV 09 bearing No. CTD/CENR/- 10MNG/VIG-10/2022-23 dated: 01.02.2023 herein marked as Annexure-B.

iii) And pass such other orders as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper in the interest of justice and equity.”

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned AGA for the respondents and perused the material on record.

3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that the petitioner /consigner purchased the subject goods from M/S.VRKP Sponge and Power Plant LLP, Bellary, who raised Tax invoice, E-invoice and e-way bill dated 29.01.2023 and entrusted the subject goods to a transporter to transport the same in vehicle No.KA-20 AB-4986 from Bellary to the premises of the petitioner at No.48, Kannur, Mangalore. The subject goods were loaded on to the vehicle on 29.01.2023 and left for its destination at Kannur, Mangalore, duly accompanied by Tax invoice, E-invoice, e-way bill and other documents. It is contended that the driver of the vehicle inadvertently and without any malafide intention missed the route and drove the subject vehicle and goods to Moodabidire on 31.01.2023, when he stopped by the roadside for the purpose of having refreshments, at that time, the 2nd respondent intercepted the vehicle and inspected the same and recorded the statement of the driver by issuing Form-GST MOV-01 dated 31.01.2023, pursuant to which, physical verification of the conveyance and goods were conducted, resulting in issuance of notice under Section 129 (3) of the KGST Act by the 2nd respondent, who detained the conveyance and goods.

4. The petitioner filed his objections dated 01.02.2023 interalia disputing the allegations made by the respondents that there was a deviation in the route by the vehicle and goods, in pursuance of which, the impugned penalty order dated 01.02.2023 was passed by the 2nd respondent against the petitioner who made payment and filed an appeal before the 1st respondent – appellate authority who dismissed the appeal by passing the impugned order dated 22.12.2023, aggrieved by which, petitioner is before this Court by way of the present petition placing reliance upon the Circular No.64/38/2018 – GST dated 14.09.2018 issued by the respondents in relation to procedure for interception of conveyances for inspection of goods in movement, detention, release and confiscation of such goods and conveyances etc., as well as the following judgments;

(i) The Joint Commissioner of Commercial Tax vs. M/s.Transways India TransportW.A.No.854/2022 dated 24.06.2024;

(ii) Kamalesh Steels vs. Deputy State Tax Officer – (2021) 123 taxmann.com 375 (Telengana);

(iii) R.K.Motors vs. State Tax Officer – (2019) 102 taxmann.com 337 (Madras).

5. Per contra, learned AGA for the respondents submits that there is no merit in the petition and that the same is liable to be dismissed.

6. Before adverting to the rival contentions, it would be necessary to extract the aforesaid Circular dated 14.09.2018, which reads as under:-

Circular No. 64/38/2018-GST

CBEC/2016/03/2017-GST

Government of India

Ministry of Finance

Department of Revenue

Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs

GST Policy Wing

***

New Delhi, Dated the 14th September, 2018

To,

The Principal Chief Commissioners / Chief Commissioners / Principal Commissioners / Commissioners of Central Tax (All)/The Principal Directors General /Directors General (All)

Madam/Sir,

Subjec

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top