Goods detention at check-post must rest on statutory grounds under sales tax law, not unrelated entry tax concerns.

Section 42 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act permits detention of goods in transit only where the statutory contingencies are present, such as non-payment of tax, improper accounting of the sale or purchase, or a need to prevent tax evasion under the Act. Detention based on omission of TNGST and CST registration numbers in the invoice, or on alleged liability to entry tax under a separate law, falls outside that statutory basis. The provision is confined to sales tax liability under the governing Act, and check-post action cannot rest on extraneous considerations.

---

---

Issues: Whether the goods detention orders passed at the check-post were sustainable under section 42 of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act.

Analysis: Section 42 empowers detention of goods in transit only when the circumstances specified in the provision exist, namely non-payment of tax, improper accounting of the sale or purchase of the goods, or a need to prevent evasion of tax under the Act. The detention orders were founded on the absence of TNGST and CST registration numbers in the invoice and on alleged liability to entry tax under a separate enactment. The petitioner was a registered dealer and the invocation of entry tax considerations could not justify detention under section 42, which was concerned only with tax liability under the sales tax law. The stated grounds therefore fell outside the statutory basis for detention.

Conclusion: The detention orders were without legal sanction and were liable to be quashed; the relief of release of the goods and vehicles followed.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions succeeded because the impugned detention action was not supported by the enabling provision and could not be sustained on the reasons recorded by the authority.

Ratio Decidendi: A check-post authority can detain goods only within the precise statutory contingencies authorised by the governing sales tax provision, and detention unsupported by that provision is illegal.

---