Home Case Index All Cases GST GST + HC GST - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1976 - HC - GSTSeizure of goods - goods not accompanied by the E-way bill - HELD THAT - On perusal of relevant documents, namely, Invoice, Goods receipt, E-way Bills etc., which are enclosed as Annexures to the writ petition and found that the E-way bill under the UPGST Act has been downloaded by the petitioner, much before the detention and seizure of the goods and the vehicle, disclosing all the necessary informations. There are no irregularity in the present transaction and, therefore, the seizure order as well as penalty notice dated 07.04.2018 issued under Sections 129(1) and 129 (3) of the Act as well as the consequential proceedings are hereby set aside. Petition allowed.
Issues:
1. Detention of goods for not having an E-way bill during transportation. Analysis: The case involved the transportation of goods from Gorakhpur to a registered dealer in Delhi, which was intercepted and detained by respondent no. 4 at Fatehgarh for not being accompanied by an E-way bill. The petitioner's counsel presented the E-way bill, downloaded before the detention, proving compliance with the UPGST Act. Upon examining the relevant documents, including the invoice, goods receipt, and E-way bills, the court found that the necessary information was disclosed in the E-way bill downloaded before the detention. Consequently, the court concluded that there was no irregularity in the transaction. As a result, the seizure order, penalty notice, and consequential proceedings issued under Sections 129(1) and 129(3) of the Act were set aside. The court allowed the writ petition and ordered the immediate release of the goods and vehicle seized on 04.04.2018 in favor of the petitioner. The judgment highlighted the importance of complying with the E-way bill requirements under the UPGST Act and emphasized that timely adherence to the necessary documentation can prevent unnecessary detentions and seizures during the transportation of goods. The decision served as a reminder of the significance of fulfilling statutory obligations to avoid legal complications and disruptions in the supply chain process.
|