Detention for diverted goods without prescribed documents upheld, with release allowed only after tax and compounding fee compliance.

Goods diverted in transit without the prescribed VAT supporting documents were found insufficiently documented, and no prima facie basis was shown to interfere with the detention notice in writ jurisdiction. The Court therefore declined to quash the detention or permit release of the goods without complying with the tax and compounding fee demand. It also preserved the petitioner's right to pursue the statutory revision remedy under the Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the detention notice for diversion of goods without the prescribed documents was liable to be quashed and whether the goods could be released without payment of the tax and compounding fee demanded.

Analysis: The goods were intercepted while being diverted to Trichy, though the accompanying documents showed delivery to the petitioner's factory at Coimbatore. The materials available did not show that the consignment was accompanied by the documents required under the VAT law and rules. In these circumstances, the Court held that no prima facie case was made out to interfere with the detention notice or to permit release of the goods without complying with the demand. The petitioner was, however, left at liberty to pursue the statutory revision remedy.

Conclusion: The detention notice was upheld and the petitioner was directed to pay the tax and compounding fee for release of the goods.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed on merits, and the goods were ordered to be released only after compliance with the tax and compounding fee demand, without affecting the petitioner's right to seek revision under the Act.

Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are diverted in transit without the prescribed supporting documents, and no prima facie case is shown for bona fide movement, the detention and demand for tax and compounding fee will not be interfered with in writ jurisdiction.

---