2024 (4) TMI 551 - HC - GST

Order of penalty issued by the respondents pursuant to the adjudication of a SCN - violation of the procedural requirements with regard to transportation of goods under the Goods and Services Tax Act - penalty imposed on the ground that electronic copy of the e-way bill that was produced by the appellant to establish that the consignment was covered by valid transporting documents shows a vehicle number, which was different from that contained in the e way bill. HELD THAT - Although it is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant Smt.Latha that the details of the goods were shown in the parent e-way bills that were generated in respect of the entire consignment, a part of which alone was being transported at the time of interception, we find ourselves unable to accept the said explanation since the statutory requirement under the GST Act and Rules has necessarily to be complied with. It is trite that when the statute prescribes the manner in which a thing has to be done, then it can be done in that manner, and no other. This is more so in relation to taxing statutes where the procedures prescribed are designed to check evasion of tax. There are no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge impugned in this Writ Appeal. The Writ Appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
The appeal concerns a penalty order issued under the Goods and Services Tax Act for procedural violations related to transportation of goods.

Issue 1: Violation of procedural requirements under the GST Act

The appellant challenged a penalty imposed for not complying with procedural requirements during the transportation of goods. The case involved interception of a vehicle without proper accompanying documents, leading to a penalty proposal of twice the tax amount. Despite the appellant's participation in the adjudication process, the penalty was confirmed due to discrepancies in the e-way bill information. The appellant contended that the absence of an Appellate Authority hindered seeking an alternative remedy. The Single Judge upheld the penalty citing the lack of provision to accept alternate documents in place of e-way bills. The Court emphasized strict compliance with statutory requirements under the GST Act, especially in tax-related matters, and dismissed the appeal due to failure to meet these requirements.

Final Decision:
The Writ Appeal was dismissed as the Court found no reason to interfere with the Single Judge's judgment, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory procedures under the GST Act to prevent tax evasion.