Order Date: 1 September 2022

Facts-

• The Petitioner, Macmet Engineering Limited is engaged in the supply of bulk materials transporting/handling systems. ITD Cementation India Limited entered into a back-to-back EPC contract with the Petitioner. Accordingly, the Petitioner placed purchase order with M/s. Phoenix Conveyor Belt India Private Limited, West Bengal, for the supply of steel cord pipe conveyor belts and splicing kits to be supplied to ITDC directly i.e. under a bill to ship to model.
•  Show Cause Notice dated 4 August 2022 was issued alleging that the vehicles carried consignments under the ‘Bill to – Ship to’ concept, but the drivers did not have invoices to support transport to ‘Bill to’ address in Tamil Nadu. The State Tax Officer, Intelligence Additional, Roving Squad also imposed a penalty as the ‘Bill to’ address mentioned the name of the Petitioner instead of ITDC.  Five vehicles were detained by the Respondent vide the order dated August 11, 2022 under Section 68(3) of the CGST Act, 2017 read with Section 129(1) of the CGST Act and Section 20 of the IGST Act, 2017.
• Therefore, a writ petition was filed by the Petitioner to quash the Impugned Order contending that no evasion of tax neither by M/s. Phoenix Conveyor Belt India Private Limited nor by the Petitioner was there and the mistakes were rectifiable in nature and further, Respondent is not the jurisdictional officer to pass Impugned order.

Issue-

• Whether the Respondent has passed the Impugned Order correctly and is the jurisdictional officer to pass an Impugned order?

Order-

• The Single Bench of Hon’ble High Court observed that in the tax invoices raised by the petitioner, the details of consignee namely, ITD Cementation India Limited, C/o. TANGEDCO, Udangudi, Thiruchendur Taluk, Thoothukudi District and GSTIN are all clearly mentioned.  The tax invoices of the petitioner have been properly recorded. It is the supplier, namely, M/s.Phoenix Conveyor Belt India Private Limited, missed the name of ITD Cementation India Limited.  In view of the same, All India Road Transport Agency name was not recorded in the transport invoices. But, the consignment notice has been rightly recorded, which finds place in the bills. 
• The Court noted that there is no evasion of tax neither by M/s.Phoenix Conveyor Belt India Private Limited nor by the petitioner.  The mistake can be rectified and there is no evasion of payment of G.S.T. 
• As per the Circular No. 10/2019 dated May 31, 2019 (Chennai), the Intelligence/Roving Squad detained the vehicles and thereafter, all the records to be handed over to the Jurisdictional Officer or to the Review Cell and thereafter, it is for the Jurisdictional Officer to pass orders on the point of classification and valuation. The jurisdictional Tax Officer would be the right person to decide the mistake and to be found whether there is loss of revenue or evasion of duty.
• The Court further, observed that the Petitioner already updated the particulars on the GST Portal even before the detention. Thus the Court held that the only mistake committed by M/s.Phoenix Conveyor Belt India Private Limited is that, in the invoice, instead of ITD Cementation India Limited, the petitioner's name is mentioned, except the said mistake, all other particulars properly recorded.
• Accordingly, the Court quashed the Impugned order and directed Petitioner to give explanation to the jurisdictional officer to see whether the triangular transaction ‘Bill to’, ‘Ship to’ is complete and thereafter, decide the case on its own merits and passes appropriate orders. Further, to safeguard the revenue, directed the Petitioner is to execute a bond for the demand and penalty raised.
• The writ petition is disposed off.