When E-way bill was downloaded before detention/seizure of the goods disclosing all the necessary informations, there was no irregularity-High Court
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2321 (2018) (05) HC
The petitioner dealer had filed the instant writ before the Hon’ble High Court challenging the detention of the goods by mobile squad on account of goods not accompanied by e-way bill.
The petitioner had sold Scrap materials after charging CGST & SGST at the prescribed rates raising Tax Invoice. Goods were then handed over to transporter.
As there was confusion with regard to requirement of E-way bill for intra-State transaction in view of the order passed by the Commissioner of State Tax, U.P. Goods & Service Tax, Lucknow under Section 138 (14) of CGST Rules, hence petitioner was under the impression that there is no requirement of E-way bill for the transaction in question.
The vehicle carrying the goods was intercepted/detained by the Assistant Commissioner, State Tax, Mobile Squad solely on the ground that the goods were not accompanied with E-way bill.
Immediately after receiving the information about the said seizure/detention, the petitioner generated E-way bill prescribed under Rule 138 of the CGST Rules and furnished the same before AC, Mobile Squad. However, the goods were ultimately seized under Section 129(1) of UPGST Act.
The petitioner, before the Hon’ble High Court placed the copy of the E-way bill, which was downloaded before the seizure of the vehicle.
The Hon’ble High Court after perusing the Invoice, Goods receipt, E-way Bills etc., found that the E-way bill under the UPGST Act had been downloaded by the petitioner, much before the detention and seizure of the goods and the vehicle, disclosing all the necessary information.
In view of the above, the Hon’ble High Court opined that there was no irregularity in the transaction and, therefore, it set aside the seizure order as well as the penalty notice issued under Section 129(1) and 129 (3) of the Act and all the consequential proceedings. Allowing the writ, it was directed that the goods and vehicle seized be released in favour of the petitioner forthwith.
Download Full Judgment Click Here >>
Lokayukta Police not an ‘intelligence and security’ organisation and hence not exempt from disclosure of information under RTI Act 2005…
Payment of imprest whether a transfer within the meaning of section 269ST – case remanded for determination In a recent…
CA Misconduct – Appellate order quashed as final judgment was not passed by same members who heard arguments. In a…
Deceased homemaker can not be considered as dependant for award of compensation under MV Act. Courts to award a composite…
CIT Revision notice u/s 263 quashed as the Assessing Officer rightly taken DVO value of property sold as actual sale…
Extension of timeline for implementation of mandatory "Ship To GSTIN" and Voluntary Closure of E-Way Bill functionalities GSTN Advisory dated…
View Comments
When E-way bill was downloaded before detention/seizure of the goods, there was no irregularity-High Court ,ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 2321 (2018) (05) HC
send this copy of judgement through mail.