1. This Writ Petition is directed against the detention notice dated 27.12.2016.
2. The petitioner's case is that High Sea Sales took place between itself and a company, by the name of STAHL India Private Limited.
2.1. The detention notice, though, proceeds on the basis that High Sea Sales did not take place for the reason that the date of the sale invoice precedes the date of the agreement of High Sea Sales.
2.2. The respondent, thus, has concluded, that the subject transaction is not eligible for exemption under
Section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act.
3. Counsel for the petitioner asserts that High Sea Sale has taken in place and that ownership in goods has passed on to STAHL India Private Limited.
3.1. According to me, if that is the position, then, STAHL India Private Limited should assail the detention notice.
3.2. Counsel for the petitioner says that the reason that the petitioner, i.e., the seller has approached this Court, is that, the detention notice has been issued to it and not to the buyer, i.e., STAHL India Private Limited.
4. In my view, this circumstance, by itself, will not give any locus to the petitioner, i.e., seller, to impugn the detention notice, if, ownership in the goods has passed on to STAHL India Private Limited.
5. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to withdraw the Writ Petition.
6. Accordingly, the Writ Petition and the connected Miscellaneous Petition are dismissed as withdrawn.
6.1. Needless to say, if, the buyer, i.e., STAHL India Private Limited approaches the Court, the Court would pass requisite orders, albeit, in accordance with law.
7. Registry is directed to return, forthwith, the original impugned order to the counsel for the petitioner.