2024 (6) TMI 282 - HC - GST

Appeal dismissed solely on the ground that the writ petition was filed after expiry of about 20 months from the date on which the appellate authority passed the impugned order - imposition of tax and penalty on the ground that the goods were being transported by the appellant without a valid e-way bill - HELD THAT - The goods were originally loaded in a vehicle bearing Registration No.WB 11 C 2575. The specific case of the appellant is that the goods which were carried by the vehicle had suffered a break down on the night of 19.11.2021 and on account of the urgency for transmitting the goods, the transporter has left no other option but to change the vehicle and the new vehicle bearing Registration No.WB 19 K 7695 had been loaded with the goods and they were delivered at the destination at Purulia at about 06.20 a.m. on 20.11.2021. It is a specific case of the appellant that during the interregnum period the transporter could not amend the e-way bill because it was during the midnight. The department has given a window of eight hours for amendment of the e-way bill, assuming the goods have been transported in the vehicle in which it was originally loaded no problem would have arisen but, however, on account of certain contingencies beyond the control of the appellant the vehicle had to be changed but the new vehicle had transported the goods and arrived at the destination at Purulia at 06.20 a.m. on 20.11.2021. Thus, it is not a case where there was any intention on the part of the appellant to evade the tax for authority to invoke the provisions of the CGST Act and imposed tax and penalty - the imposition of tax and penalty by the adjudicating authority has confirmed by the appellate authority calls for interference. Appeal allowed.

Summary

Issues involved: Appeal against dismissal of writ petition due to delay in filing, justification for delay, imposition of tax and penalty for transporting goods without a valid e-way bill.

Delay in filing writ petition: The appellant's writ petition was dismissed due to being filed after 20 months from the date of the impugned order. The appellant explained the delay by stating that the speaking order was not communicated, the original advocate passed away, and difficulties were faced in obtaining the necessary documents. The court found the reasons genuine and held that the writ petition was entertainable.

Imposition of tax and penalty: The main issue was whether the authority was justified in imposing tax and penalty for transporting goods without a valid e-way bill. The appellant's case was that due to a breakdown, the goods were transferred to a different vehicle without amending the e-way bill. The court noted that the only discrepancy was the lack of a valid e-way bill and that the appellant had genuine reasons for the situation. It was concluded that there was no intention to evade tax, and the imposition of tax and penalty was deemed unjustified.

Conclusion: The court allowed the appeal, set aside the order dismissing the writ petition, quashed the impugned orders, and directed the authorities to refund the tax and penalty collected from the petitioner within 12 weeks.