9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 330 - HC - GSTAmount involved in E-way bill - petitioner has generated e-way bill for more amount and on physical verification the same was found less - contravention of provisions of CGST and SGST 2017 or not - Held that - The e-way bills have been annexed on page 20-23. The hard copies are not required. There is no inference drawn by the opposite parties that the e-way bills were not correct or they were fake - an officer of not less than the rank of Assistant Commissioner, who is well versed with the facts of the case, may be present before the Court on the date fixed. List on 14.2.2019 as fresh.
Issues:
Petitioner's compliance with CGST and SGST provisions regarding payment of tax at the time of sale of goods and generation of e-way bill. Analysis: The petitioner argued that he had already paid the tax at the time of sale of goods as mentioned in the sales invoice and the e-way bill. He contended that any discrepancy between the e-way bill amount and the physical verification amount should not be considered a contravention under GST Rules. The petitioner emphasized that once GST is paid, there should be no apprehension of tax evasion by the authorities. He further stated that any interference with his business would violate his rights. The petitioner submitted e-way bills as evidence, asserting that the opposite parties did not find any issues with the correctness or authenticity of the e-way bills. The petitioner's counsel highlighted the importance of the generated e-way bills to support the compliance with tax regulations. The learned Standing counsel requested a week's time to seek instructions, indicating the need for further clarification or information from the authorities. The Court directed that an officer of at least the rank of Assistant Commissioner, well-informed about the case, should be present during the next hearing to provide insights and clarification on the matter. In conclusion, the Court scheduled the next hearing for a specific date to allow for the presence of the designated officer and further examination of the case. The judgment reflects a focus on ensuring compliance with GST regulations while addressing any discrepancies or concerns raised by the petitioner regarding tax payment and e-way bill generation.
|
