2023 (9) TMI 273 - HC - GST

Detention of goods alongwith vehicle - goods carrying valid E-way bill or not - evasion of tax or not - HELD THAT -The contention of the petitioner has to be rejected that merely because of the reputation of the Company; the Court and the Department should assume that there would be no evasion carried out. As far as the possibility of evasion, when e-way bills were not generated, there could be multiple transport on the very same invoice which could lead to evasion. The third invoice is with respect to consignment of goods to Tamil Nadu, an inter State transport. The date of billing is far earlier to the other bills. In fact, even with respect to the first and second invoices, the billing was done before the e-way bill for three invoices was generated. There was no reason as to why the said invoices were also not included in the e-way bill generated, especially when the invoices were generated before the e-way bill was generated, the goods were consigned to the very same party and it was intended to be transported in one vehicle. There are absolutely no reason to interfere with the order passed - petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
The judgment involves a challenge to an order passed under Section 68(1) read with Section 129(1) of the Bihar Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, regarding the generation of e-way bills for consignments of goods.

Details of the Judgment:

Issue 1: Interpretation of Notification on E-way Bill Requirement
The petitioner argued that as per a Notification, no e-way bill is required for intra-state transactions within Bihar if the consignment value does not exceed Two Lac Rupees. They contended that consignments below this value were not required to have e-way bills. However, the government pleader argued that all four invoices were sent as one consignment in a single truck, with one consignment destined for Tamil Nadu, making it an inter-State movement not covered by the Notification.

Issue 2: Allegation of Tax Evasion
The petitioner's reputation as a reputed company was cited as a reason to argue against the presumption of tax evasion. The court rejected this argument, stating that the possibility of evasion exists when e-way bills are not generated, as multiple transports on the same invoice could lead to evasion.

Issue 3: Examination of E-way Bill and Invoices
The court examined an e-way bill indicating a total value of Rs. 7,90,000.14, with three separate invoices listed, two below Two Lacs Rupees. The consignment supported by the e-way bill was sent with three other consignments, including one destined for Tamil Nadu. The court noted discrepancies in the billing dates and destinations, concluding that there was no justification for the excluded invoices in the e-way bill.

Conclusion:
The court found no reason to interfere with the order passed, dismissing the writ petition and leaving the parties to bear their costs. The vehicle was directed to be released conditionally, with any necessary recovery to be made from the petitioner.