M/S Rishi Stonex vs The State Of Assam And 5 Others

Court
Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/7
GAHC010112292025

2026:GAU-AS:15706
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WP(C)/2841/2025
M/S RISHI STONEX
A PROPRIETORSHIP CONCERN BEARING GSTIN 17ADUPA9013C1ZR
HAVING ITS SHOP SITUATED AT 10TH MILE MAWASMAI VILL RI BHOI
DIST PIN 793101 MEGHALAYA AND IS REP BY ITS PROPRIETOR SRI
JITENDER AGARWAL, S/O ROHTASH AGARWAL
VERSUS
THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 5 OTHERS
REP BY COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVT
OF ASSAM, GUWAHATI,781006
2:THE PRINCIPAL /CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX
GOODS AND SERVICES TAX ASSAM KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI 6
ASSAM
3:THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF STATE TAX GUWAHATI ZONE B
KAR BHAWAN DISPUR GUWAHATI 6 ASSAM
4:GLOBAL IMPEX SERVICE
HAVING ITS PLACE OF BUSINESS AT PLOT NO B 4 III PHASE RIICO
INDUSTRIAL AREA KISHNGARH RURAL AJMER RAJASTHAN 305801 AND
ALSO HAVING THEIR OFFICE AT B4 MARBLE MANDI BEHIND
KISHANGARH DIST AJMER RAJASTHAN 305801
5:THE CONTAINER CORPORATION OF INDIA
CONCOR BHAWAN C 3 MATHURA ROAD OPPO APOLLO HOSPITAL NEW
DELHI 110076
6:THE TERMINAL MANAGER
ICD CONCOR AMINGAON GUWAHATI DIST KAMRUP (RURAL) PIN 781031
ASSA

Page No.# 2/7
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

For the Petitioner(s) : Ms. B. Chauhan, Advocate

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Gogoi, Addl. AG, Assam

· Date on which Judgment was reserved : NA
Date of Pronouncement of Judgment : 14.10.2026
·
· Whether the pronouncement is of
the Operative Part of the Judgment : Yes

· Whether the full Judgment has been
Pronounced : NA
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Ms. B. Chauhan, the learned counsel appearing on behalf
of the Petitioner and Mr. B. Gogoi, the learned Additional Advocate
General, Assam appearing on behalf of the Finance and Taxation
Department of the Government of Assam.
2. The Petitioner herein who is registered under the Central
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘the CGST Act of
2017’) is a consignee of certain goods. These goods were
transported through the Respondent No.4 and the Petitioner claims
to have paid the necessary taxes in that regard. The said goods
which were transported by the Respondent No.4 were intercepted
at the Amingaon Railway Yard by the officials of the Principal

Page No.# 3/7
Commissioner of State Tax, Assam suspecting that some
unscrupulous traders are procuring Marbles, Granites, Tiles
declaring undervalue and underweight from the States of Gujarat
and Rajasthan in containers through Railway and consignments are
loaded at ICD, Amingaon.
3. Upon arrival of the train consisting of 80 numbers of
consignments, the Respondent No.2 in order to verify the records,
invoices, e-way bills, weight of such goods to authenticate the
genuineness of the purchases made by the taxpayer, asked the
Terminal Manager ICD, Amingaon to cooperate with the officials by
providing documents and records available for these 80 numbers of
containers along with the names of the consignees in the interest
of Government Revenue.
4. It is the claim of the Petitioner that out of the 80 numbers of
containers, three wagons/containers bearing Nos. CXNU1104211,
CXNU1867126 and CXNU1889758 were not goods which were
undervalue, underweight declarations or any case of evasion of
taxes. There was full compliance to the provisions of the
Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘ISGT Act
of 2017’).

Page No.# 4/7
5. Be that as it may, it is the further case of the Petitioner that
the Respondent Authorities in the Assam State Goods and Services
Tax issued notice only to the Respondent No.4 who is the
transporter as to why penalty at the rate of 200% will not be
imposed on tax amount of Rs.1,47,565/-. The Respondent No.4
had agreed to make the payment of the said tax but did not make
the payment and accordingly the State Authorities were
contemplating to take action under Section 129 of the Assam
Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (for short ‘AGST Act of 2017’).
6. The basic grievance of the Petitioner in the present
proceedings is that the Petitioner being a consignee ought to have
been issued the Show Cause Notice so that the Petitioner would
have been in a position to explain that the goods in question were
neither undervalue nor underweight or a case of evasion of tax is
made. On account of non-issuance of such notice and steps being
taken for initiating proceedings under section 129 of the AGST Act
of 2017, the Petitioner has approached this Court by filing the
present writ petition.
7. This Court vide an order dated 03.06.2025 issued notice and
further directed that the Respondent Authorities should not take
any further steps for carrying out any auction of the goods in

Page No.# 5/7
question for realization of an amount of Rs.2,95,130/-. Additionally,
this Court also observed that it shall not be a bar on the part of the
State GST Department to issue notice to the Petitioner alleging
violation of the provisions of the AGST Act of 2017.
8. Pursuant to the issuance of notice, the Respondents have not
filed their affidavit-in-opposition. However, Today, Mr. B. Gogoi, the
learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of the
Finance and Taxation Department has placed before this Court an
instruction dated 08.07.2025 which is kept on record and marked
with the letter “X”.
9. From a perusal of the said instruction, it transpires that the
detention of the goods in question was made to verify the records
of the movement of goods, but since the dealer did not appear at
the time of verification, the representatives of the transporter, i.e.
the Respondent No.4 appeared and admitted his fault of non-
uploading of the Part-B of the E-way bill and accordingly notice
was issued only to the transporter. It is seen that while there is a
stay to the auction, the service upon the transporter is yet to be
completed. On the other hand, on account of the goods being
detained by the Respondent Authorities, the Petitioner is suffering
losses.

Page No.# 6/7
10. Under such circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that the
instant writ petition can be disposed of taking into account that the
dispute is on the aspect as to whether the goods in question were
undervalue or underweight declarations for evasion of taxes and
this aspect can be very well satisfied by the Petitioner by showing
the necessary documents. Be that as it may, for showing such
documents, a notice has to be issued to the Petitioner.
11. Accordingly, this Court therefore disposes of the instant writ
petition with the following observations and directions:
(i) The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati Zone is
directed to issue a fresh notice upon the Petitioner within a period
of 15 days from today asking the Petitioner to show cause in the
manner set out in the notice which was issued to the Respondent
No.4 i.e. dated 18.05.2023.
(ii) Upon such notice being issued, the Petitioner would be at
liberty to submit a reply to the said Show Cause Notice along with
all necessary documents.
(iii) The Assistant Commissioner of State Tax, Guwahati thereupon
shall decide the said show cause proceedings in accordance with
the AGST Act of 2017 as well as the Rules framed thereinunder

Page No.# 7/7
read with the IGST Act of 2017 and the Rules framed thereinuner.
(iv) If the Petitioner is aggrieved by such decision, the Petitioner
would be at liberty to approach the appropriate forum.

Digitally signed by
Bijoy Saha
Date: 2026.10.15
18:04:38 +05'30'
Bijoy Saha
JUDGE
Comparing Assistant