At the investigation stage of GST detention proceedings, the Court found prima facie material supporting continued custody of the goods and conveyance, including interception of the vehicle en route to a destination different from the declared one and other investigative circumstances. The affixture of the detention order on the vehicle and office notice board, after non-appearance of the persons summoned, was not treated as illegal, and extension of time for inspection was considered a permissible statutory step. The petitioner's allegation that his statement was coerced was held to raise disputed factual questions unsuitable for Article 226 scrutiny. The writ petition was dismissed, subject to statutory remedies and a direction to furnish the detention order if the petitioner appears.
At the investigation stage of GST detention proceedings, the Court found prima facie material supporting continued custody of the goods and conveyance, including interception of the vehicle en route to a destination different from the declared one and other investigative circumstances. The affixture of the detention order on the vehicle and office notice board, after non-appearance of the persons summoned, was not treated as illegal, and extension of time for inspection was considered a permissible statutory step. The petitioner's allegation that his statement was coerced was held to raise disputed factual questions unsuitable for Article 226 scrutiny. The writ petition was dismissed, subject to statutory remedies and a direction to furnish the detention order if the petitioner appears.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
